W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > October 2004

Re: Action item

From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie>
Date: Tue, 12 Oct 2004 14:02:49 +0100
Message-ID: <416BD5F9.7080307@cs.tcd.ie>
To: Tommy Lindberg <tommy.lindberg@gmail.com>
Cc: Yunhao Zhang <yzhang@sqldata.com>, www-xkms@w3.org


Good one guys. Do we need to say somewhere that empty ds:KeyInfo
MUST NOT be put into requests? (Is an empty ds:KeyInfo even
schema valid? Bet we can get disagreement there:-)

Secondary question to server implementers: if the request had
contained a KeyValue you'd never heard of, but is otherwise
the same, would you return bob's key? (I realise that the
spec is properly silent on this "policy" issue, but just
wondered.)

Stephen.

Tommy Lindberg wrote:

> That's it, Yunhao.
> 
> Tommy
> 
> 
> On Tue, 12 Oct 2004 08:24:42 -0400, Yunhao Zhang <yzhang@sqldata.com> wrote:
> 
>>Hi Tommy,
>>
>>Thanks for the insider information. I am still getting a failure with out
>>the KeyName. The request message is something like,
>>
>><SOAP-ENV:Envelope
>>xmlns:SOAP-ENV="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/"
>>xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
>>xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
>>xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#">
>>- <SOAP-ENV:Body>
>>- <xkms:LocateRequest xmlns:xkms="http://www.w3.org/2002/03/xkms#"
>>Id="_ce8734ab-cf09-40f0-813e-aea6aa889015"
>>Service="http://62.77.172.83:4080/xkiss/soap11">
>>  <xkms:RespondWith>xkms:KeyName</xkms:RespondWith>
>>  <xkms:RespondWith>xkms:KeyValue</xkms:RespondWith>
>>  <xkms:RespondWith>xkms:X509Cert</xkms:RespondWith>
>>- <xkms:QueryKeyBinding xmlns:xkms="http://www.w3.org/2002/03/xkms#"
>>Id="_dd53968f-b75d-4984-bf64-857d4bc23134">
>>  <KeyInfo xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" />
>>  <xkms:KeyUsage>xkms:Signature</xkms:KeyUsage>
>>  <xkms:KeyUsage>xkms:Encryption</xkms:KeyUsage>
>>  <xkms:KeyUsage>xkms:Exchange</xkms:KeyUsage>
>>  <xkms:UseKeyWith Application="urn:ietf:rfc:2633"
>>Identifier="bob@example.com" />
>>  <xkms:TimeInstant Time="2004-10-12T12:50:09Z" />
>>  </xkms:QueryKeyBinding>
>>  </xkms:LocateRequest>
>>  </SOAP-ENV:Body>
>>  </SOAP-ENV:Envelope>
>>
>>I suspect the empty KeyInfo caused the problem, is it true?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>
>>Yunhao
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Tommy Lindberg" <tommy.lindberg@gmail.com>
>>To: "Yunhao Zhang" <yzhang@sqldata.com>
>>Cc: <www-xkms@w3.org>
>>Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2004 5:16 AM
>>Subject: Re: Action item
>>
>>
>>>Hi Yunhao -
>>>
>>>
>>>>Yes. I can reconfirm your claim,
>>>
>>>Glad to hear that, thanks.
>>>
>>>
>>>>I got a failure ...
>>>
>>>I checked out your request; if I am not mistaken, you specify a sequence
>>
>>of
>>
>>><KeyInfo><KeyName>Bob</KeyName></KeyInfo>. You don't need to do that.
>>>The Locate operation will work just fine with UseKeyWith alone.
>>>
>>>Regards
>>>Tommy
>>>
>>>
>>>On Mon, 11 Oct 2004 19:43:57 -0400, Yunhao Zhang <yzhang@sqldata.com>
>>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>>>A quick note to confirm that I have implemented the asynchronous
>>>>>behaviour required by test case T7 as outlined in the original e-mail
>>>>>below.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Yes. I can reconfirm your claim, although I got a failure for the final
>>>>results, which was caused by my tool for not providing a correct KeyName
>>
>>in
>>
>>>>the request message. BTW, I wonder if we should define the KeyName to be
>>>>used in all the test cases if it is required. So far, each
>>
>>implementation
>>
>>>>requires a different KeyName, and it is hard to automate the tests.
>>>>
>>>>Regards,
>>>>
>>>>Yunhao
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
> 
Received on Tuesday, 12 October 2004 13:00:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 October 2009 08:39:23 GMT