Re: Issuer Alternative Names

On Thu, Jan 27, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>wrote:

> I think we should add as an issue [1] to explore how the Issuer Alternative
> name could be used either in server certificates or in client certificates.
> The semantics of this would need to be looked at in more detail. This could
> be useful. Well that means we should see what kind of interesting use cases
> that makes possible.
>
> Btw. nathan pointed a few days to the following RFC that has some useful
> background information on SAN's in certificates.
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-saintandre-tls-server-id-check-14
> I have not studied it in detail. If someone can gives us a one paragraph
> summary of what they are doing that would help.
>
> Henry
>
> PS. Perhaps this is a good thing to do initially, is to put together some
> short issues people have and we can add them to the database if not
> obviously
> out of scope. Then we can do a straw poll on which issues we work on first,
> so
> that we try to concentrate on a few at a time.
>

Anyone from the XG should be able to raise issues in the tracker and
continue the discussion on this mailing list. Note that to create an ISSUE
or an ACTION, you must use the web interface [1] or IRC (but you can follow
up on the mailing list thereafter). The web interface is probably the
easiest, see [2] for more details.

Steph.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2005/06/tracker/web



>
>
> [1] to the issues list here
>    https://github.com/webid-community/webid-spec/issues
>
>
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
>
>
>