IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [icnrg] recursive key Lookup in CCNX

Ken Calvert <calvert@netlab.uky.edu> Mon, 27 April 2020 16:51 UTC

Return-Path: <calvert@netlab.uky.edu>
X-Original-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4468B3A0F4E for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 09:51:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=netlab.uky.edu
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id WEhpgisn328w for <icnrg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 09:51:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.netlab.uky.edu (mail.netlab.uky.edu [128.163.140.42]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0245A3A0F5D for <icnrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 09:51:35 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from culp.local (cpe-96-29-182-38.kya.res.rr.com [96.29.182.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.netlab.uky.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 48C3B180C8 for <icnrg@irtf.org>; Mon, 27 Apr 2020 12:51:32 -0400 (EDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=netlab.uky.edu; s=default; t=1588006294; bh=JRlUndZw2W6lRCZwN5xMG7+yxn3JCR5yrcZJfzTedb8=; h=From:Subject:Date:References:To:In-Reply-To:From; b=TfSMu3cE8ipyF+561FBmVDGXwtiX5iG7J+baLkGewRQYrhz010FkMX04IYd0blnbo /wvxCqFejjHpY8UvkDXK0RUn0Hj0pUjLFqn4OfZ2MpiqT2hpoqRNtzVRExgvosOOt2 3DyJSK5M5tPpvGgJFR0TmYny17x2I8FOJ5uZa9VSgoRvgilK6zCHVs/5dbT41SgCZX DcmIlpIwttyuYdQ/CNQEXLhDHItwyWHpBeQGRcGALVwYMXyMJ3mzAJ50WFlEl+4rQU oj8eQbL+33KLfhRK+EEEVdrK0wKmGPK2l4WSDL+TrUHAgqom6IBn0XkByrI639DBj1 MIU6mXeZ1EgeQ==
From: Ken Calvert <calvert@netlab.uky.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.5\))
Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 12:51:30 -0400
References: <91F2CCB5-F962-4DEF-A8C2-B8BCCD32F185@netlab.uky.edu>
To: icnrg@irtf.org
In-Reply-To: <91F2CCB5-F962-4DEF-A8C2-B8BCCD32F185@netlab.uky.edu>
Message-Id: <1413FF54-C269-40EC-87CF-202FD7C46143@netlab.uky.edu>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.5)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/icnrg/6seBZR2fXxCZa0PRDgge1xDH47M>
Subject: Re: [icnrg] recursive key Lookup in CCNX
X-BeenThere: icnrg@irtf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Information-Centric Networking research group discussion list <icnrg.irtf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/options/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/icnrg/>
List-Post: <mailto:icnrg@irtf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.irtf.org/mailman/listinfo/icnrg>, <mailto:icnrg-request@irtf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2020 16:51:38 -0000

> Related question:  What is the essential security difference between an X.509 certificate and a KeyLink?  

Correction: s/KeyLink/Key/, i.e., a signed content object containing a Key

> If there's no difference, why require that trust chains be of length one, and end in X.509 certs (or known keys)?  And if there is a security difference, why define a separate Key object at all?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email