> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pieter Kasselman [mailto:]
> Sent: Friday, January 17, 2003 10:22 AM
> To: 'Robert Zuccherato'; 'Gregor Karlinger';
> ''
> Subject: RE: [dss] Use cases and requirements input
>
>
> Hi Robert, one comment below.
>
> Cheers
>
> Pieter
>
> > > 2.2.4 Allow for configuration profiles
> > >
> > > - Trust
> > >
> > > The requester should be able to specify the trust settings
> > > (accepted root certificates, accuracy of CRL checking, ...)
> > > to be applied by the service when validating a signature.
> > >
> > > Since this trust-related information can be quite bulky, the
> > > requester should alternatively identify this information by
> > > a named profile.
> >
> > I'm not opposed to allowing requesters to specify the trust
> settings,
> > but not at the expense of producing a protocol that is more
> > complicated that necessary. I'm guessing that this feature
> would not
> > be required in the majority of signature validation server
> > environments. The trust settings would be implicitly
> defined by the
> > service. At least in our first iteration I would like to produce
> > something that is simple, usable and works. We can then build upon
> > that.
> >
> [Pieter Kasselman] One way to meet this requirement is
> to allow for a configuration profile or policy to be
> specified (as remarked in the original post it can be as
> simple as a URL that is included). This could be a optional
> (non-mandatory) parameter. For a first iteration we do not
> need to define exactly how such a policy or configuration
> profile is expressed.
I agree; this could be a simple solution for a first version of the
validation service.
/Gregor
