On 25 Sep 2012, at 16:45, Stephen Kent <[email protected]> wrote:
> Henry,
>
>>> WebID is not in the charter for this WG. If you want to discuss S/MIME and
>>> WebID, you are free to do so elsewhere, of course. There is no need for you
>>> to Cc this WG on that work.
>> Neither I suppose is TLS, or MIME btw, or many other standards that are
>> discussed on this list. But knowing that they exist has always been
>> important to IETF practice. It's called: not re-inventing the wheel. But I
>> see you have a problem with that. Sorry to have hurt your feelings.
> If you were to read the DANE charter
> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/dane/charter/)
> you would see that TLS is cited 5 times, so your supposition above is wrong
> with regard to
> its first assertion.
Thanks. But not MIME - So the point holds well enough :-)
Anyway, the webid spec
http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/spec/
also is very clearly tied to TLS, and would benefit a lot from DANE being
deployed. So my interest in DANE is not a side issue. The strongest pushback
against WebID ( and so using client certificates ) is the cost of server
certificates for most players. ( the next strongest is the inability to logout
from all but Firefox browsers )
In fact my interest in DANE can be traced back to a discussion I had with Dan
Kaminsky at Hackers at Random (HAR) 3 years ago, where I quickly gave him an
overview of WebID ( At the time foaf+ssl) ). This was before the creation of
the DANE group. The protocols are very similar logically.
That is why it would be worth discussing things and seeing how these protocols
can work together. And perhaps there is even some interesting way for the MIME
proposal to work out nicely.
Henry
>
> Steve
> _______________________________________________
> dane mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
_______________________________________________
dane mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dane
