On Feb 27, 2006, at 3:22 PM, David Boreham wrote:
I think this is a red herring. It is not necessary to define what
humans mean by 'identity' for this work.
Instead all we need to do is define what the computers that
implement the DIX protocol mean by
'identity' : a much easier task IMHO.
I believe that all we need to know is that one identity needs to be
differentiated from another one
and that we have 'stuff' that belongs to each identity.
I agree with the first paragraph.
The second not quite, I'm sure we'll need a little more. Using my
own terminology, an identity is also something that a client can
assert, where that assertion will be backed up by an identity server,
and where the ability to assert said identity is a sufficiently
limited ability for the assertion to be a useful piece of information.
(For client, read agent if you prefer)
Lisa
_______________________________________________
dix mailing list
[email protected]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dix
