RE: [xri-editors] further thinking on mustUnderstand

["Dave McAlpin" <Dave.McAlpin@epok.net>]

I don't think so. Tokens, in your example, apply to authorities. They'd
be placed in XRIDescriptors/XRIDescriptor/Authority/Token.
MustUnderstand would be relative to the Authority, not the XRID.

-----Original Message-----
From: Peter C Davis [mailto:peter.davis@neustar.biz] 
Sent: Friday, February 04, 2005 9:40 PM
To: Dave McAlpin
Cc: xri-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [xri-editors] further thinking on mustUnderstand

On Friday 04 February 2005 02:19 pm, Dave McAlpin wrote:
> Both of these cases seem to argue for MustUnderstand semantics on an
> Authority element, not on the XRID which can describe multiple
> authorities. In the second case especially, a client shouldn't be
> precluded from processing Service elements just because he doesn't
> understand how to pass proper credentials to some resolution
authority.
> Is that correct?

i suppose that depends on where the token extension points are placed...
token 
placement is likely to be XRIDescriptors/XRIDescriptor/Token, since
these are 
(potentially) unique for each authority, and required for processing 
'next-level' resolution.... in this use case.

SO the processing would require (a) resolver to process the XRID,
extract the 
Token, and add that to the HTTP header for the next resolution step.
that 
seems to require modifications to the XRID.

--- peterd


-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.302 / Virus Database: 265.8.5 - Release Date: 2/3/2005