On Dec 5, 2012, at 10:22 AM, Marc Petit-Huguenin <[email protected]> wrote:

> 
> My suggestion was not about "recertification" - I think that the current
> mechanism, which is to resend the data signed with the new certificate is OK
> for now.  What I was talking about is the unfinished discussion from
> Vancouver, on how to renew a certificate so the Node-ID(s) previously
> allocated do not change when the certificate is renewed.
> 

Well, that's what I was calling "recertification"; new vert, same Node-ID. One 
could call it "certificate replacement", I suppose.


> The spec currently uses a server side mechanism to "remember" the Node-IDs
> (which can be storage based or, as EKR suggested in Vancouver, hash based).
> The problem I see with this is the requirement that there is only one
> certificate per account, which can make things difficult for example if a user
> has multiple devices (with a device possibly hosting multiple nodes) but only
> one account.  The user can request a multiple Node-ID certificate, but has to
> find a way to know which Node-ID(s) goes into which devices.

Maybe we should expand this discussion with some use cases. When would a user 
need multiple devices? I personally only have a half-dozen or so 
smartphone/tablet devices, three laptops, and a couple of server boxes. Are 
those different users or different devices with one user? Jabber has some 
disambiguation; each user-device binding gets a sub-name in the space of the 
username.


> My proposal was to use the previous certificate instead of the CSR when
> requesting a renewal.  Because requesting a certificate with a CSR would
> return a different set of Node-IDs each time, a single account can be used on
> multiple devices.  IMO that makes things easier for the client (can manage
> multiple devices from the same account) and for the server (no need to
> "remember" anything).

Logically, that seems ok to me as long as the previous cert hasn't yet expired 
or been revoked.  So it seems feasible to get a new cert for the same node-IDs 
preemptively, but if you're offline and your cert expires, you have to re-store 
everything with the new cert. That seems like an acceptable limitation. An 
active peer node keeps its data from churning, and a disconnected node churns 
more. Of course, a "disconnected but connectable" client node could wake up, 
re-cert, and then go back to sleep periodically without churning.

But I'm not sure how to run OpenSSL's CA in such as way as to get a new cert 
based on an old cert, without an intermediate CSR. How does that work?

--
Dean





_______________________________________________
P2PSIP mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/p2psip

Reply via email to