- From: Daniel Ash <Daniel.Ash@identrus.com>
- Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2002 15:48:19 -0500
- To: "'Rich Salz'" <rsalz@zolera.com>, hirsch@zolera.com
- Cc: www-xkms@w3.org
- Message-ID: <2B55DABB95C4D4119C1300508BD953F134CC8B@BLUE01>
The only distinguishing factor of the 4-corner is the "peerwise trust relationship", which is certainly out-of-scope for XKMS... which leaves us with an environment that supports referrals (even less Identrus-y). Without referrals it will be more difficult to separate complicated trust models (cross-certification, bridges.. etc) from the trust relationship between client and service. This separation, I think, is tantamount in shielding end entities from more complexity than necessary. Other trust infrastructures could benefit, as much as Identrus could, from a referral mechanism (I'm not quite sure what the difference is between referrals and server chaining). Does anyone else agree that a referrals (or server chaining) requirement should replace the 4-corner requirement? -dan > -----Original Message----- > From: Rich Salz [mailto:rsalz@zolera.com] > Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 1:02 PM > To: hirsch@zolera.com > Cc: www-xkms@w3.org > Subject: Re: requirements - 4-corner wording > > > How about making the definition less Identrus-y? > > 4-corner model > A processing and/or trust environment where end-entities > interact with a > single trusted point of contact, and each such contact has a peerwise > trust relationship with all other contacts. > /r$ > -- > Zolera Systems, http://www.zolera.com > Information Integrity, XML Security >
Received on Thursday, 24 January 2002 15:48:50 UTC