Subject: RE: Permanent identifiers in QC

From: Anders Rundgren <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 10:09:15 +0200

<snip>
>My observation in regards to this is:

>1) Adding this name form would add confusion to the QC specification since
>it would overlap use of serialNumber in the DN.

Correct.  That is why I have pushed "DN interpretation support" mechanisms

>2) Use of DN attributes covers all needs related to identification of the
>subject, and that's all we need to support electronic signatures, at least
>as seen from the EU-directive. And as far I know, this goes for any other
>legal system.

Hope so.

>3) Use of DN in combination with either implicit knowledge, use of Directory
>name in the subjectAltname ext, use of a related policy identifier or use of
>information in the qcStatements extension also provide support for use of
>permanent identifiers identified as such.

All over-the.map solutions but in principal correct.

>4) In each and every case raised in favor of this new name form, the benefit
>relates to access control rather than electronic signatures.

Do not agree.  Permanent IDs are used in Sweden TODAY (by authorities) for things
that cannot be regarded as access control.   Permanent IDs helps to clear out many things
without bothering the CA which is very cost-efficient.  There is nothing that says that CAs
are particularly interested in becoming an extension to the Police.  Particularly not
commercial CAs.

>5) This is a new input to the discussion, which before adoption must be
>reviewed by the community over some time.

Correct

<snip>

Anders

---

From: "Stefan Santesson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 30 Mar 2000 22:42:05 +0930

Anders,

I'm delighted to se us agree on so much :-)

... and the only disagreement I think can be explained by a
misunderstanding.

<snip>
> are particularly interested in becoming an extension to the

Maybe I should have explained this further. What I mean here is not the
benefit from using a permanent identifier, but the benefit from constructing
a new name form that explicitly defines this property, rather than using
serial Number in DN for the same purpose.

/Stefan