Re: [certid] draft slides for IETF 77

[Peter Saint-Andre <[e-mail]>]

On 3/19/10 9:32 AM, Paul Hoffman wrote:
> At 10:47 PM -0600 3/18/10, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>> On 3/18/10 3:20 PM, Shumon Huque wrote:
>>> On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 02:05:15PM -0700, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>>>> At 1:28 PM -0600 3/18/10, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>>>> Content-Type: multipart/signed; 
>>>>> protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1; 
>>>>> boundary="------------ms080304070605060202080805"
>>>>> 
>>>>> I've been asked to make a presentation about our work to the
>>>>> PKIX WG session on Monday at 15:20 Pacific. Draft slides are
>>>>> attached and feedback is welcome -- this is mostly just an
>>>>> overview to get people interested in reviewing the I-D and
>>>>> providing feedback.
>>>> 
>>>> In slide 3: s/PKI/PKIX. OpenPGP has its own (unspecified) PKI.
>>>> 
>>>> But, more importantly in slide 3: Bullets 2, 3, and 5 disagree
>>>> with each other. A server is a machine; it is not a domain or a
>>>> URI. A domain name is not a URI. And so on. Consider adding a
>>>> bullet saying "this is known to be unclear".
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> I think "server" here refers not to a machine or set of machines,
>>> but to an "application service" (application server?), ie. the
>>> server side component of a client-server protocol.
>> 
>> Correct.
> 
> A public key listed in a certificate is associated with *something*
> that has access to the associated private key. The machine has access
> to that private key, as does the server application/daemon. If you
> want to make this distinction, you need to do so much more clearly in
> the draft.

Paul, I agree that this needs to be clearer in the I-D. I've added a
slide on this point and will discuss it at the PKIX session, then fix up
the I-D as soon as possible after Anaheim.

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/