- From: Hallam-Baker, Phillip <pbaker@verisign.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2003 19:40:38 -0800
- To: "Www-Xkms (E-mail)" <www-xkms@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CE541259607DE94CA2A23816FB49F4A311007E@vhqpostal6.verisign.com>
T he updated specs should arrive tommorow, have network issues... <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms/2003Feb/0025.html> [Frederick] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms/2003Feb/0025.html [37] DONE Digest Authenticated Request If the original request was authenticated by means of an XML Signature with a message digest as the signing algorithm, the service can still ensure a strong binding of the response to the original request by means of the <RequestSignatureValue> element. [44] DONE Where the security requirements of the XKRSS protocol differ from those of XKISS they are addressed by the XKRSS protocol directly rather than relying upon the message security binding. For example the XKRSS registration functions are designed to support use in modes in which a client registration request is accepted by a Local Registration Authority and then forwarded to a Master Registration Authority. In this mode it is essential that the proof of possession of the private key being registered can be verified by both the Local Registration Authority and the Master Registration Authority, even though the authentication for the request sent to the Master Registration Authority is likely to be provided by the Local Registration Authority, rather than the original requestor. Similar considerations affect the distribution of private keys. [XTAML] Put in reference to XTAML which changed name to WS-TrustAxiom yesterday. I used the new name. [34] Removed line, it is redundant. [64] This paragraph is actually a reference to another so I think it is ok [90] ISSUE [Joseph] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms/2003Feb/0028.html <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms/2003Feb/0028.html> [13] DONE [63]DONE nsertion of an XKMS message into the SOAP message structure must not alter namespace prefixes, or use of default namespaces, within the XKMS message. Any change in these encodings will likely break an XML Signature internal to the XKMS messages due to the use of QNames and namespace prefixes. The implementer must insure that prefix values used with the SOAP namespaces <http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope> http://www.w3.org/2002/06/soap-envelope (SOAP 1.2) and <http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope> http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope (SOAP 1.1) do not conflict with prefixes used in the XKMS message. [Section 4]DISCUSS Not a biggie, but I really would like to discuss it before such a major change. [Shivram]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xkms/2003Mar/0008.html [STOPPRESS] [2]DONE [20] ISSUE [22] Done XML Schema for XKMS 2.0 Last Call Candidate 2003 [25] ISSUE [64] DONE Not sure what is more readable, tried a colon [190,318]DISCUSS Part II [1].[2] DONE
Received on Wednesday, 26 March 2003 22:40:42 UTC