Re: [core] Conclusion -- Endpoint Client Name / Endpoint Name in RD draft

["Kovatsch, Matthias" <[e-mail]>]

> Von: core [mailto:[e-mail]] Im Auftrag von peter van der Stok

> I probably misunderstand the meaning of optional.
> What I understand from making ep optional, is that ep is not returned in the lookup interface unless explicitly requested Differentiation
> between registrations (endpoints) cannot be done by ep
> (,d) value, but should be done differently (how?).

To my understanding, the proposal is the following:

A registration can be done without the "ep" query parameter, iff the Endpoint Client Name can be derived in another way from the registration message. This way should (or I guess Hannes would say MUST) be the security context. In that sense, "ep" as registration query parameter becomes optional, but "ep" remains a central, mandatory attribute in the RD for each registered resource (used for endpoint lookup, filtering etc.).


Thanks Ludwig for your pointer how this could work.

@Hannes: Could you provide some more detail, how exactly the Endpoint Client Name is extracted from "security context"? Overall, I like this, but we should provide concrete text on how people should do it.

Best,
Matthias