Re: FW: Delegate

["Brian M. Thomas" <bt0008@entropy.sbc.com>]

>   With a binary CertDepth or FinalCert (let's use Carl's proposed
> terms, they are more clear), is clear that you must allow the 18/8
> prefix people to delegate. How much is their business. 
>   I imagine that "MAX_INT" means infinity in SET? So you can simulate
> a binary delegation with the set [0,MAX]. Those who need more detailed
> control can pick integer values. 
> 
>     Derek> So, how can you ask people to set cert-depths if they don't
>     Derek> know how deep those chains need to be?
> 

I think the weight of the arguments (the ones I agree with, anyway:)
favors my earlier assertion that there are actually three meaningful
values: zero, one, and infinity.  Unfortunately, that's too much for
a boolean, and a full integer seems a little wasteful.

So the argument stands at "simpler is better" vs. "better safe than sorry".

Any more opinions?

brian


Brian Thomas - Distributed Systems Architect  bt0008@entropy.sbc.com
Southwestern Bell                             bthomas@primary.net
One Bell Center,  Room 34G3                   Tel: 314 235 3141
St. Louis, MO 63101                           Fax: 314 235 0162

---

• Prev by Date: Re: FW: Delegate
• Next by Date: RE: FW: Delegate
• Prev by thread: RE: FW: Delegate
• Next by thread: RE: FW: Delegate
• Index(es):
  • Main
  • Thread