Hi Job,
On Wed, Sep 9, 2026 at 3:10 PM Job Snijders <[email protected]> wrote: > Dear Behcet, > > On Wed, Sep 09, 2026 at 12:44:35PM -0700, Behcet Sarikaya via Datatracker > wrote: > > Section 2.3 > > RP Relying Party > > This document discusses the use of RP in routing however there is > another very > > important area where RP is used, in identity protocols like OAUTH 2.0. > The > > resources they protect in each case are completely different. This leads > to a > > confusion in readers mind. I think the document should have one or two > > paragraphs to explain this unfortunate (?) name convention or if there > are > > places where they interact. > > "Relying Party" is a generic term used in multiple contexts. As I > understand it, a 'Relying Party' is an application or service that > consumes authorization or authentication assertions and checks their > validity using a trusted third party. > > (In context of the RPKI, these trusted third parties are represented by > self-signed X.509 root certificates, so-called "Trust Anchors".) > > The phrase 'RP' is used in the RPKI (which is based on X.509), and > the broader X.509 community, and indeed also in communities around > technology like OAUTH 2.0. > > The RPKI community has been using the phrase "Relying Party (RP)" in > dozens of RFCs for nearly two decades. > > I had suggested adding a short text like: So we can say that they are both relying on a trusted external system but their domains, architectures, and trust models are entirely different. It seems that there are no places where OAuth 2.0 and the RPKI interact. Regards, Behcet > > I don't think now is the moment or this is the document to suddenly > start explaining that OAUTH also uses the phrase 'RP'. :-) > > Kind regards, > > Job >
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
