[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: persistent identities
On Wed, 26 Feb 1997, David P. Kemp wrote:
>
> If the SPKI community believes that there is nothing of value to be
> learned from X.509, fine. However, there may be some SPKI users who
> are open to ideas, regardless of their origin. I was addressing my
> comments to them.
This discussion has been getting a little close to a religious war (see
http://www.texemarrs.com/archive/oct96/nsapower.html for why :-).
I think the general consensus is that there are times when you need to
bind a real-world identity tightly to a key, and times when you don't.
SDSI can support this sort of namespace, but doesn't require it.
Name spaces with persistent identities with tight bindings to physical
entities have lots of nice properties when you need to have audit trails
ten miles deep; they just shouldn't be required for when Perry McDuck
wants to virtually wallow in his swiss money vault.
Simon
Follow-Ups:
References: