- From: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Sep 2001 13:22:59 -0400
- To: xenc <xml-encryption@w3.org>
2001-September-17 Chair: Joseph Reagle Note Taker: Joseph Reagle [3]ascii] Participants * Joseph Reagle, W3C * Blair Dillaway, Microsoft * Katherine Betz, IBM * Donald Eastlake 3rd, Motorola * Ed Simon, XMLsec * Frederick Hirsch, Zolera * (regrets) Amir Herzberg, NewGenPay * John Messing, Law on Line News * Takeshi sent an update to the Signature Decryption Transform (informed by implementation experience) that I'll post shortly. Status of documents * We'd like to go to last call, need to finish up a few of these issues. Reviewing [4]Previous Items From [5]previous minutes minutes. 1. Eastlake: add real life examples in section 5.5 to illustrate. Pending: take some time to resolve. 2. Action Hughes: ([6] XML Encryption Processing Model) Will investigate and send an email on Xerces implementation using XNI, or DOM when processing Element or Element Content. Pending. 3. Action Eastlake:Tweak [7]KeyAgreement for keysize and (pseudo random number generation. Expect to complete within a few days. Action Eastlake: make the tweaks to (section 5.4) Key Transport such that [8]public key encryption is not limited to key transport, but can be used to encrypt actual data though it is inefficient. Expect to complete within a few days. 4. Action Reagle: [9]Add text on the creation of nonce and integrity in the processing rules. Will complete when last issue is resolved. [5] http://www.w3.org/Encryption/2001/Minutes/010820-tele.html [6] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-encryption/2001Aug/0031.html [7] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-encryption/2001Aug/0062.html [8] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-encryption/2001Sep/0000.html [9] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-encryption/2001Sep/0002.html Requirements ... Draft * [10]Scenario for Plaintext Integrity Reagle demonstrated how one might satisfy Herzerg's requirements using XML-DSIG, how do people feel? Simon: no strong direction. Don: leaning towards Amir's proposal as presently specified. Frederick: no strong feeling. Katherine: no position. Reagle: Ok, I'll respond to Amir's latest questions on the list and post a more formal poll, but it looks like we are not leaning one way or the other very strongly, and expect the present spec to carry the day if that continues to be the case. * Reagle: Were behind our milestones. Action Reagle: Update charter. [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/xml-encryption/2001Sep/0021.html Misc. * Next call on October 1, 2001.
Received on Monday, 17 September 2001 13:23:00 UTC