[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Name Constraints, was Re: [caops-wg] Re: ca signing policy file
- To: "Frank Siebenlist" <franks@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: Name Constraints, was Re: [caops-wg] Re: ca signing policy file
- From: "Cowles, Robert D." <rdc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 12 Oct 2005 14:20:09 -0700
- Cc: "David Chadwick" <d.w.chadwick@xxxxxxxxxx>, <helm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,"Von Welch" <vwelch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, "Tony J. Genovese" <tony@xxxxxx>,"CAOPS-WG" <caops-wg@xxxxxxx>, "Olle Mulmo" <mulmo@xxxxxxxxxx>,"Joni Hahkala" <joni.hahkala@xxxxxxx>,"Jules Wolfrat" <wolfrat@xxxxxxx>, "Ron Trompert" <ron@xxxxxxx>
- Delivered-to: grdfm-caops-wg-outgoing@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
- Delivered-to: grdfm-caops-wg@mailbouncer.mcs.anl.gov
- Sender: owner-caops-wg@xxxxxxx
- Thread-index: AcXPbNJjlgZaS7DIT/q5vAuvZboEeQAAogpA
- Thread-topic: Name Constraints, was Re: [caops-wg] Re: ca signing policy file
The obvious choice for the "identifier" is the public
key. The drawback is that it would be good to change
the keypair more often than you change identity.
Can you explain name collisions cannot occur?
BC
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Frank Siebenlist [mailto:franks@mcs.anl.gov]
...
>
> When you say "name collisions", you must be referring to either
> compromised CAs or errors as name collisions should not occur...
>