Re: [kmip] Groups - v0.4KMIP1 2PGPChangesProposal-MA.doc uploaded

[Bruce Rich <brich@us.ibm.com>]

The text for Alternative Name says that
it SHALL NOT be unique.  Strictly interpreted, that means the server
cannot allow one that is different from all the others that it has.
I think a more clear statement would
be that "The server guarantees nothing about the uniqueness of this
name".

Bruce A Rich
brich at-sign us dot ibm dot com




From:      
 Judith Furlong <Judith.Furlong@emc.com>
To:      
 kmip@lists.oasis-open.org
Date:      
 11/27/2012 03:03 PM
Subject:    
   [kmip] Groups
- v0.4KMIP1 2PGPChangesProposal-MA.doc uploaded
Sent by:    
   <kmip@lists.oasis-open.org>

---

Document Name: v0.4KMIP1 2PGPChangesProposal-MA.doc

---

Description
This proposal covers changes and additions that should be made to the KMIP
1.2 specification and supporting documents to allow support for PGP usage
scenarios within KMIP. This includes removal of the PGP Certificate Type
concept that has been in KMIP since the 1.0 version and the addition of a
PGP Key Type. Other attributes introduced by this proposal, namely the
Alternative Name Type and several new Link Types, while applicable to PGP,
may also be useful for addressing other usage scenarios.
Download Latest Revision
Public Download Link

---

Submitter: Ms. Judith Furlong
Group: OASIS Key Management Interoperability Protocol (KMIP) TC
Folder: Proposals
Date submitted: 2012-11-27 13:02:04