W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms-ws@w3.org > November 2001


From: <spouliot@motus.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2001 08:49:18 -0500
To: www-xkms-ws@w3.org
Message-ID: <OF3D5FC351.E49A8F08-ON85256B11.004820BF@motus.qc.ca>
[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms-ws/2001Nov/0060.html
> I think the real issue is whether the folks planning to build such
> services believe one of them makes their life simpler.

From an implementation point of view including the trust model into the
request/response may be a little easier (at least in my design) but not
enough to influence the definition of the specification.

However adding querying for trust models has the potential of getting very
complicated (both in its definition, implementation and in user
interaction). So i tend to favor the URL and the "let's see the web page"
(à la CPS) [1] approach.

[2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms-ws/2001Nov/0062.html
> or, is there a general issue with correlating requests and responses?

Isn't the TransactionID element already in place just for that ?
AFAIK the TransactionID should works for single, or many, URLs.

As for question 2 [2], URLs as "trust selectors" are fine with me.

Sébastien Pouliot
Architecte Sécurité / Security Architect
Motus Technologies
tel: 418 521 2100 ext 307
courriel / email: spouliot@motus.com
Received on Tuesday, 27 November 2001 08:49:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:07:34 UTC