[leslie@thinkingcat.com: Re: OIDs as URI/URNs....]

----- Forwarded message from Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com> -----

X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.72 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
Approved-By:  Leslie Daigle <leslie@THINKINGCAT.COM>
Date:         Mon, 27 Nov 2000 12:45:16 -0500
Reply-To: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
From: Leslie Daigle <leslie@thinkingcat.com>
Organization: ThinkingCat Enterprises
Subject:      Re: OIDs as URI/URNs....
To: URN-IETF@LISTS.NETSOL.COM

(I'm not cross-posting, 'cause <your> listserv stripped the
XMLDSIG list address cc: off your posting, and I don't know what
it is :-)

I'd have some concern about:  what happens when there is discrepancy
between the digit and textual representations (i.e., it's an
error).

I'm not entirely sure that the XML problem couldn't be solved by
a convention of a comment line that accompanies any identifier,
to spell out what they need.

But, that's fairly top-of-my-head.

Leslie.

Michael Mealling wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>   I'm crossposting this between the URN Working Group and the XMLDSIG
> Working group. The issue is whether or not the OID URN namespace
> document that is the process of being published should be ammended
> to include the textual representation of the node in the OID tree.
>
> the issue is whether the OID URN NID should look like this:
> urn:oid:itu-t(0)/identified-organization(4)/etsi(0)/electronic-signature-sta
> ndard(1733)/part1(1)/idupMechanism(4)/etsiESv1(1)
>
> (note, the slashes would have to be changed or encoded since slashes
> are deprecated in URNs due to hierarchy semantics in RFC 2396)
>
> or like this:
>
> urn:oid:0.4.0.1733.1.4.1
>
> XMLDSIG apparently has some requirements for readability that is considered
> dangerous for the persistence requirements for URNs. Should I update
> the pending RFC 3001 and resubmit or should it go forward as is?
>
> -MM
>
> ----- Forwarded message from Karl Scheibelhofer <Karl.Scheibelhofer@iaik.at> -----
>
> From: "Karl Scheibelhofer" <Karl.Scheibelhofer@iaik.at>
> To: <michaelm@netsol.com>
> Subject: RE: OIDs as URIs
> Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 16:58:28 +0100
> X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook IMO, Build 9.0.2416 (9.0.2911.0)
> In-Reply-To: <20001127085139.D9334@bailey.dscga.com>
> Importance: Normal
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
>
> > Hmm...interesting. URNs have the soft requirement of not being
> > human readable.
> > Where is the expection coming from for a user seeing and needing to
> > understand an OID?
>
> the main purpose for use to use OIDs in URIs is in XML signatures. there we
> will need to use OIDs in form of URIs to refer to policies, other documents,
> ... that are already present and hav an OID. because XML has the great
> advantage that it is plain text, it can be read (debugged) by humans by just
> viewing it with any text editor. URIs are normally in form that you can
> roughly get an idea what's behind it. if we just use the pure number
> presentation of OIDs, i think (and others share this opinion) we are going
> to lose one advantage.
> however, i am aware of the fact that it is not absolutely required to work.
> but it was a requirement in designing XML "XML documents should be
> human-legible and reasonably clear". i think a pure number presentation of
> OIDs does not meet this requirements.
>
> best regards
>
>   Karl Scheibelhofer
>
> --
>
> Karl Scheibelhofer, <mailto:Karl.Scheibelhofer@iaik.at>
> Institute for Applied Information Processing and Communications (IAIK)
> at Technical University of Graz, Austria, http://www.iaik.at
> Phone: (+43) (316) 873-5540
>
> ----- End forwarded message -----
>
> --
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Michael Mealling        |      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
> Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
> Network Solutions       |          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Days used to be longer."
   -- ThinkingCat

Leslie Daigle
leslie@thinkingcat.com
-------------------------------------------------------------------

----- End forwarded message -----

-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Mealling	|      Vote Libertarian!       | www.rwhois.net/michael
Sr. Research Engineer   |   www.ga.lp.org/gwinnett     | ICQ#:         14198821
Network Solutions	|          www.lp.org          |  michaelm@netsol.com

Received on Monday, 27 November 2000 12:52:43 UTC