On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Stephen Kent wrote:
At 11:29 PM +0100 2/9/12, DIEGO LOPEZ GARCIA wrote:
>...and I do agree with you in that whichever entity making such
assertion (X.509, SAML, JWTŠ) has to be authoritative for the identity
asserted if you want it to be usable.
I think we are
Ah, that is much better.
It looks to me as if the authors may have had the idea of migrating to
a catenate scheme at some later date. After all the catenate scheme is
arguably merely a variation on the Merkle tree.
I am trying to work out if perhaps a profile of ERS would work..
There is a provi
On 2/10/12 9:13 AM, "Phillip Hallam-Baker" wrote:
>Yes, I am aware of them.
>
>The problem with LTANS was that the catenate cert technology was still
>encumbered at the time and there was a company formed to exploit the
>patents that was very aggressive in filing lawsuits, including
>lawsuits ov
Yes, I am aware of them.
The problem with LTANS was that the catenate cert technology was still
encumbered at the time and there was a company formed to exploit the
patents that was very aggressive in filing lawsuits, including
lawsuits over stuff that they clearly had no claim to.
I was just go
I think there are a number of questions
1) Is there a need for a general purpose catenate certificate notary protocol?
2) Is there benefit to using one within a 'right key' solution?
2a) Is there benefit to performing the verification at the client edge?
2b) Should the right key use the same notar
Was anyone involved with or aware of this Working Group, or it's
published documents: http://www.ietf.org/wg/concluded/ltans.html ?
A very crude notary service I remember was a simple one that was
designed to receive a lot of automated email, and would produce hashes
of them that would build up in
Hi Phill,
Some subset of this does look like the kind of thing the
IETF could do if there are people interested. And we could
even do it well, if there are people who'll write code and
try deploy stuff as the IETF trundles along.
Be good to get a feel for the level of interest in that.
Note, a
