[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: XKMS and NIH RE: Simplifying IKE
> There is a difference between by suggesting support for a set of IETF
> standards (the WG for which I do co-chair) vs. your promoting a
> VeriSign/Microsoft technology. Perhaps you find this difference too
> subtle, but I feel confident others on the list can make the
> distinction.
If you want to start flame wars I suggest that you try alt.flame.
The fact is that many if not most successful IETF protocols were
designed by a small group and then brought to the IETF for
standardization and change control. XKMS simply follows that tried
and tested method.
It is an open standard and has been submitted to a highly respected
standards body backed by the main PKI vendors and several major
customers.
The choice of W3C was determined by two factors, first XKMS is both
built on and designed to extend XML technology specified by W3C, the
second is that the consensus amongst the prospective members was that
W3C was the preferred forum.
I suggest that you bother to find out who is a prospective member of
the XKMS group before commenting on their security expertise.
Phill
Phillip
Follow-Ups: