Re: [xri] Minutes: XRI TC Telecon 2-3PM PT Thursday 2009-07-16

From
[arkus Rabadello
Date
2009-07-20T20:06:01+00:00
ID
Thread
Re: [xri] Minutes: XRI TC Telecon 2-3PM PT Thursday 2009-07-16
I assume that the "ds:KeyInfo at the XRD level" idea will be the mechanism of choice for XRI-based applications such as XDI messaging.
I.e. when =markus sends a signed XDI message to =drummond, the signature can be verified by discovering =markus' key from his XRD.

From an XRI perspective I think it makes total sense to have the "key info of the XRD Subject" at the XRD level.

Markus

On Mon, Jul 20, 2009 at 5:03 AM, Drummond Reed <> wrote:

Following are the minutes of the unofficial telecon of the XRI TC at:

Date:  Thursday, 16 July 2009 USA

Time:  2:00PM - 3:00PM Pacific Time (21:00-22:00 UTC)

ATTENDING

Eran Hammer-Lahav

Scott Cantor

Nika Jones

Joseph Holsten

Breno de Medeiros

John Bradley

Nat Sakimura

George Fletcher

Drummond Reed

REGRETS

Will Norris (on vacation)

1) XRD 1.0 - LINK PROCESSING RULES

See this thread:

        http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri/200907/msg00075.html

Eran's proposal is "best match", i.e.:

* Once an XRD is retrieved, the processor looks for a link match.

* If it finds exactly one, it is done.

* If it finds more than one, it selects based on priority (identical

priority = random selection)

* If it finds none, it looks for linked XRDs.

* It it finds exactly one, it follows it.

* If it finds more than one, it selects based on priority (identical

priority = random selection)

We didn't discuss backtracking in the case of multiple XRD links. This is

still an open issue.

We discussed that if XRD link behavior is application specific, that makes

it hard/impossible to develop a generic XRD library. So standardizing XRD

linking has real advantages.

We discussed using a dedicated XRD element for linked XRDs vs. a regular

link. The consensus was that XRD links needed all the same processing as

regular links, so we should just use a link.

# ACTION: ERAN to post to the wiki/email the list with several options for

how best to structure XRD links.

2) XRD 1.0 KEY MANAGEMENT

The next topic was key management and how ds:KeyInfo was going to be used,

as discussed by Scott and Nat on the list.

Scott clarified this by saying there are three places ds:KeyInfo can appear:

        1) Inside a signature.

        2) Inside a link.

        3) At the XRD level.

The first two uses are clear: when ds:KeyInfo is inside a signature, it is

the key info for the signer. When inside a link, it is key info for the

signer of the target XRD.

The third case is new. There was concensus that ds:KeyInfo at the XRD level

should represent the key info of the XRD Subject, even if the subject is not

the signer of the XRD.

Scott also explained that SAML found that in some cases ds:KeyInfo was not

enough, and that it needed to be wrapped in another element.

John said that a rising requirement is the need to transition from XRD

discovery/trust to SAML metadata discovery/trust.

Breno said that there are two trust phases: a boostrapping phase, and a

chaining phase. XRD must define the XRD bootstrapping phase, and then the

XRD chaining phase, but could transition over into other signing protocols

such as PKIX.

Scott said that we should not duplicate what PKIX does.

# ACTION: Scott to send a proposal to the list on what should be included in

the XRD trust section.

3) LRDD - SUBJECT OF A HOST-META XRD

See:

        http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/xri/200907/msg00007.html

Eran said he had not heard any opinions back about this. The consensus on

the call was to just go with Eran's proposal for describing a "SubjectSet"

with a very simple XML structure, and to NOT make it extensible.

We then discussed if this should be defined in LRDD or XRD. The consensus

was XRD.

# ACTION: ERAN to proceed with a writeup of the proposed SubjectSet element.

4) XRD 1.0 SPEC STATUS/IMPLEMENTATIONS

Joesph asked how close we were. Eran said the XRD 1.0 schema is done, and we

just need to decide about the trust section, and the remaining open issues

on LRDD. Eran also said Mark Nottingham has just posted his Link Header spec

(revision 06) for IETF last call. This is our last dependency.

# ACTION: ERAN and WILL to coordinate on the next draft.

# ACTION: ERAN to determine if the XRI TC can provide any support for Mark's

draft at IETF.

5) XRI SYNTAX 3.0 WORKING DRAFT 02 STATUS/ISSUES

No change since the last report: Drummond is making progress but will not

have this ready until early August due to travel/vacation time.

6) NEXT CALL

Next week, standard time. Note: Drummond will be on vacation next week so he

will not be able to attend; someone else will need to send an agenda and

take notes.

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that

generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:

https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php