IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [certid] Domain Components

Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org> Sat, 19 June 2010 14:56 UTC

Return-Path: <phoffman@imc.org>
X-Original-To: certid@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: certid@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1F6893A67F8 for <certid@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 07:56:04 -0700 (PDT)
X-Quarantine-ID: <0OnujBqir1tG>
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Amavis-Alert: BAD HEADER, Non-encoded 8-bit data (char F6 hex): To: Michael Str\366der <michael@st[...]
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.704
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.704 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.150, BAYES_50=0.001, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0OnujBqir1tG for <certid@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 07:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from hoffman.proper.com (Hoffman.Proper.COM [207.182.41.81]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7D20B3A6875 for <certid@ietf.org>; Sat, 19 Jun 2010 07:56:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.20.30.158] (75-101-30-90.dsl.dynamic.sonic.net [75.101.30.90]) (authenticated bits=0) by hoffman.proper.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id o5JEu7XW076132 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 19 Jun 2010 07:56:09 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from phoffman@imc.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <p0624082ec8428aeca84e@[10.20.30.158]>
In-Reply-To: <4C1CD73B.6000602@stroeder.com>
References: <4C12A27D.3070308@stpeter.im> <p0624086ac8386db66483@[10.20.30.158]> <4C1CA2B8.9080103@isode.com> <p0624082ac8427d3d733f@[10.20.30.158]> <4C1CD30B.4090200@isode.com> <4C1CD73B.6000602@stroeder.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 07:56:06 -0700
To: Michael Str�der <michael@stroeder.com>, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
From: Paul Hoffman <phoffman@imc.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Cc: IETF cert-based identity <certid@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [certid] Domain Components
X-BeenThere: certid@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Representation and verification of identity in certificates <certid.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/certid>, <mailto:certid-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/certid>
List-Post: <mailto:certid@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:certid-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/certid>, <mailto:certid-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 19 Jun 2010 14:56:04 -0000

At 4:42 PM +0200 6/19/10, Michael Ströder wrote:
>Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>> Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>> No, I'm saying that the order in which you are supposed to take the
>>> DCs has historically been unclear. "Most significant" means different
>>> things to different people.
>>>
>> I probably sound like a broken record, but the order is very clear for
>> LDAP. I don't see why is this going to be different for X.509 certificates.
>
>Yes, I concur RFC 2247 is pretty clear and is meant to be applied to X.500
>names as well.

...and you think that all (or even typical) PKIX implementers read either of those documents?

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email