[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: multiple certification rules

To: Carl Ellison <cme@cybercash.com>, Bob Smart <Robert.Smart@mel.dit.csiro.au>
Subject: Re: multiple certification rules
From: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 1997 09:22:59 -0700
Cc: plipp <plipp@iaik.tu-graz.ac.at>, Ben Wright <Ben_Wright@CompuServe.COM>, "spki(post)" <spki@c2.net>
In-Reply-To: <3.0.2.32.19970620141029.036c1760@cybercash.com>
References: <199706150621.AA06872@shark.mel.dit.csiro.au> <Your message of"Thu, 05 Jun 1997 21:03:30." <19970605210382.NTM2563@iaik.tu-graz.ac.at>

At 11:10 AM -0700 6/20/97, Carl Ellison wrote:
>At 04:21 PM 6/15/97 +1000, Bob Smart wrote:
>>Either way it seems that public key infrastructure should only
>>cover signing keys. Mixing in other sorts of keys into that infrastructure
>>is unnecessary and confusing. Or maybe I'm missing something?
>
>I concur completely as do the other authors of the SPKI draft, I believe.

I also agree.  K.I.S.S.


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Frantz       | The Internet was designed  | Periwinkle -- Consulting
(408)356-8506     | to protect the free world  | 16345 Englewood Ave.
frantz@netcom.com | from hostile governments.  | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA

References:

Re: multiple certification rules

From: Carl Ellison <cme@cybercash.com>

Prev by Date: Re: SPKI signing keys only
Next by Date: Re: SPKI signing keys only
Prev by thread: Re: multiple certification rules
Next by thread: Call for Papers: Jurimetrics Special Edition on PKI
Index(es):
- Main
- Thread