Now is probably a good time to acknowledge RFC 6648. In short, if
entrust see value in having an account number, then you should just
add a field "account" and be done with it, otherwise you end up with
prefix-regret. As for operator, maybe "operator": { "name": "Me",
"email": "d...@email.me" }.
On 5 October 2016 at 04:44, Ray Cheng <ray.ch...@entrust.com> wrote:
>> Surely vendorized keys would be better:
>>
>> {
>> "com.example.blorpNo": "BLORP122946"
>> }
>
> Can you provide a bit more details on what you mean by "vendorized keys" and
> how it differs from the arbitrary name-value pairs in the proposal?
>
> It seems the above can be represented as:
> "ca-extension": [
> "com.example.blorpNo": "BLORP122946"
> ]
>
> _______________________________________________
> Acme mailing list
> Acme@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
_______________________________________________
Acme mailing list
Acme@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
