Subject: Static Identifiers {Re: Update of the QC personalData issue}

From: "Anders Rundgren" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 11 Nov 1999 07:48:57 -0000

Stefan,
you wanted comments on the static identifiers.
Here are the votes from the Uppsala  :-)

>One way to go here is that an appropriate attributeSemantics OID may provide
>the definition that the dnQualifier attribute is populated with a value that
>have this property, i.e. to be a unique static identifier of the certified
>subject.

This works. I can accept it although it is has a certain 'patch'-like flavor.

But the CLEAN and MEAN solution however is to make a brand new
attribute or extension with implicit semantics and a restricted syntax (for
reasons mentioned in earlier postings).   But this thing really also belongs to
son-of-2459 that needs to readdress the UID stuff.  Synchronization required!

>An alternative could be to define that dnQualifier in QC always MUST contain a
>unique value for the subject (within the set of all certificates issued by a
>CA)

As noted by others this is a redefinition of an existing attribute.  No good IMO.

Anders