Subject: RE: Serial number and dnQualifier in QC

From: Anders Rundgren <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 16:03:30 +0100

Stefan,
Do you really read this list?  Overloaded semantics has been questioned by many others!

>Neither is the concept of serial numbers defined and even if we all have our
>own interpretation of what a serial number is, I se no reason, and no
>possibility, to exactly define the concept of serialNumber more than the
>current QC 03 draft already does.

For a standard that is designed to support legally binding signatures and
INTEROPERABILITY we have then come to the point where we apparently need a
de-facto standard instead, so we know what a serialNumber really is.
Could someone from VeriSign PLEASE inform us how YOU
intend to utilize serialNumbers so the world has at least SOMETHING to cling to?

Its odd that WAP-forum actually succeeded to specify conditions regarding serialNumber
that absolutely does not fit within the QC-03 draft....

WAP:

     "Certificate-issuing applications including this attribute in the subject name of an entity
     must not reuse the attribute value in certificates issued to other entities"

That is definitely NOT applicable to a DN disambiguer

And please inform ETSI that WAP-certs (that may very well be used in legally
demanding situations) have another identity concept.

Anders

---

From: "Stefan Santesson" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 16:27:30 +0100

Anders,

The WAP definition fits well in the PKIX QC definition, they just put more
constraints on the usage.

/Stefan

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anders Rundgren [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Sent: Thursday, February 17, 2000 16:04
> To: [email-masked]; 'Stefan Santesson'; 'SEIS-List';
> [email-masked]'
> Cc: 'Magnus Nystrom'
> Subject: RE: Serial number and dnQualifier in QC
>
>
> Stefan,
>      "Certificate-issuing applications including this
> attribute in the subject name of an entity