Subject: Welcome your kind comments on "draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture".

From: Zhipeng Zhou <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 11:12:53 +0800

Stefan and all,
I'd ask if the PKIX guys in the Sweden meeting could feeback me your kind
comments or suggesions on my draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture
<blocked::http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture
-00.txt>  .
Since some reasons, I could not be in the meeting. Welcome your emails
anytime.
Thanks very much.
Zhipeng

-----------------------------------------------------

Huawei Software Technologies Co.,Ltd.

Floor 2, Building A, NO.48，Ning Nan AV.,Nanjing, P.R.of China
Zipcode:210012
E-Mail:  <mailto:[email-masked]> [email-masked]
Phone:(+86) 25-82276771
Fax:(+86) 25-82276760

Mobile:(+86) 13404162849
-----------------------------------------------------

****************************************************************************
***********************************
　　本邮件及其附件含有华为公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人或
群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用

（包括但不限于全部或部分地泄露、复制、或散发）本邮件中的信息。

    如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件！
****************************************************************************
***********************************

****************************************************************************
***********************************
    This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from
HUAWEI, which is intended only for the

person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information
contained herein in any way(including,

but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or
dissemination) by persons other than the intended

recipient(s) is prohibited. 

    If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone
or email immediately and delete it!
****************************************************************************
***********************************

---

From: "Perez, Aram" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 2009 12:50:15 -0700

Hi Zhipeng,

Interesting draft RFC. Here are a few minor comments:

 *   “Trusty” is not a word. I believe what you want to say is “trusted relationship”.
 *   In section 5.1 you are using the binary format description language we defined in OMA DRM but you have not explained how it is used.

Take care,
Aram

On 7/21/09 8:12 PM, Zhipeng Zhou  wrote:

Stefan and all,
I'd ask if the PKIX guys in the Sweden meeting could feeback me your kind comments or suggesions on my draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture <blocked::http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture-00.txt>  .
Since some reasons, I could not be in the meeting. Welcome your emails anytime.
Thanks very much.
Zhipeng

Floor 2, Building A, NO.48，Ning Nan AV.,Nanjing, P.R.of China
Zipcode:210012
E-Mail: [email-masked] <mailto:[email-masked]>
Phone:(+86) 25-82276771
Fax:(+86) 25-82276760

Mobile:(+86) 13404162849

***************************************************************************************************************
　　本邮件及其附件含有华为公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用

    如果您错收了本邮件，请您立即电话或邮件通知发件人并删除本邮件！
***************************************************************************************************************

***************************************************************************************************************
    This e-mail and its attachments contain confidential information from HUAWEI, which is intended only for the

person or entity whose address is listed above. Any use of the information contained herein in any way(including,

but not limited to, total or partial disclosure, reproduction, or dissemination) by persons other than the intended

    If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by phone or email immediately and delete it!
***************************************************************************************************************

---

From: Zhipeng Zhou <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2009 08:57:06 +0800

Hi Aram,
Nice to hear you.
Are you going to Sweden ?
If you can help me gathering more comments in the meeting, that will be
exactly wonderful for me.
Thank you.
Zhipeng

  _____  

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Perez, Aram
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 3:50 AM
To: PKIX
Subject: Re: Welcome your kind comments on
"draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture".

Hi Zhipeng,

*	“Trusty” is not a word. I believe what you want to say is
“trusted relationship”. 

*	In section 5.1 you are using the binary format description language
we defined in OMA DRM but you have not explained how it is used.

Take care,
Aram

Stefan and all,

Mobile:(+86) 13404162849

---

From: Tom Gindin <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2009 09:46:02 -0400

I don't see any signature applied by Proxy Device B, so what is 
the point of its certificate in this protocol?  I am not questioning the 
function of the proxy itself, just of its certificate.  If device B's 
rights are to be added to device A's authorization, should it not 
authenticate itself at some point, perhaps through a countersignature?

                Tom Gindin

Zhipeng Zhou <[email-masked]> 
Sent by: [email-masked]
07/22/2009 08:57 PM

To
"'Perez, Aram'" <[email-masked]>
cc
"'PKIX'" <[email-masked]>
Subject
RE: Welcome your kind comments on 
"draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture".

Hi Aram,
Nice to hear you.

From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] 
On Behalf Of Perez, Aram
Sent: Thursday, July 23, 2009 3:50 AM
To: PKIX
Subject: Re: Welcome your kind comments on 
"draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture".

Hi Zhipeng,

“Trusty” is not a word. I believe what you want to say is “trusted 
relationship”. 
In section 5.1 you are using the binary format description language we 
defined in OMA DRM but you have not explained how it is used.

Take care,
Aram

Stefan and all,
I'd ask if the PKIX guys in the Sweden meeting could feeback me your kind 
comments or suggesions on my draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture 
<blocked::
http://tools.ietf.org/id/draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture-00.txt> 
 .
Since some reasons, I could not be in the meeting. Welcome your emails 
anytime.
Thanks very much.
Zhipeng

Mobile:(+86) 13404162849

***************************************************************************************************************
　　本邮件及其附件含有华为公司的保密信息，仅限于发送给上面地址中列出的个人
或群组。禁止任何其他人以任何形式使用

---

From: Zhipeng Zhou <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 09:44:05 +0800

Thanks for comments. 
In DRM specification, the Request message will contain the signature of the
Request entity. 
I think better to give a concise introduction of this point.
Here I am not quite clear of your said " If device B's rights are to be
added to device A's authorization", can you pls give me a use case to help
me understand it.
Thank you.
Zhipeng

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Tom Gindin
Sent: Friday, July 24, 2009 9:46 PM
To: Zhipeng Zhou
Cc: 'Perez, Aram'; 'PKIX'
Subject: RE: Welcome your kind comments on
"draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture".

        I don't see any signature applied by Proxy Device B, so what is the
point of its certificate in this protocol?  I am not questioning the
function of the proxy itself, just of its certificate.  If device B's rights
are to be added to device A's authorization, should it not authenticate
itself at some point, perhaps through a countersignature?

                Tom Gindin

To

Hi Aram,
Nice to hear you.

Hi Zhipeng,

Take care,
Aram

Stefan and all,

Mobile:(+86) 13404162849

---

From: Tom Gindin <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 25 Jul 2009 17:40:07 -0400

The last sentence of the first sentence on page 6 goes, "Once all 
these verifications are correct, the Service Server will also catch the 
rights that are authorized to Proxy Device B by Request Device A via 
parsing the elements in the Authorization document."  I am not sure what 
that means, precisely.  If you mean "will also cache the rights authorized 
on behalf of Request Device A (via parsing ...) for use through Proxy 
Device B", then B has no independent set of rights.  That could also be 
worded "will cache the rights delegated by Request Device A (via parsing 
...) to Proxy Device B".
        I assume that A is trying to delegate those rights specified in 
the ServiceRights field.  What rights does B now have?  It could be the 
intersection of A's configured rights with ServiceRights, or the 
intersection of B's configured rights with ServiceRights, or the union of 
B's pre-existing configured rights with the intersection of A's configured 
rights and ServiceRights.

                Tom Gindin

07/24/2009 09:44 PM

To
Tom Gindin/Watson/IBM@IBMUS
cc
"'PKIX'" <[email-masked]>
Subject
RE: Welcome your kind comments on 
"draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture".

Thanks for comments. 
In DRM specification, the Request message will contain the signature of 
the
Request entity. 
I think better to give a concise introduction of this point.
Here I am not quite clear of your said " If device B's rights are to be
added to device A's authorization", can you pls give me a use case to help
me understand it.
Thank you.
Zhipeng

-----Original Message-----
On

the
rights

                Tom Gindin

To

Hi Aram,
Nice to hear you.

Hi Zhipeng,

Take care,
Aram

Stefan and all,

 .

Mobile:(+86) 13404162849

---

From: Zhipeng Zhou <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:05:59 +0800

That sentence means after parsing the authorization document the Service
Server would exactly know what service rights can be issued to Device A
through the delegate of Device B.
Take an example in the routine life, A asks B to borrow 50 dollars from the
bank, then the bank will just lends 50 dollars (not 100) to A through the
hands of B. 
Sure, the wording will be reshaped.
If your second paragraph is about the update of authorization, I feel a new
section is needed to explain that part.

Thank you.
Zhipeng

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked] [mailto:[email-masked]] On
Behalf Of Tom Gindin
Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 5:40 AM
To: Zhipeng Zhou
Cc: 'PKIX'
Subject: RE: Welcome your kind comments on
"draft-zhipeng-pkix-drm-proxy-architecture".

        The last sentence of the first sentence on page 6 goes, "Once all
these verifications are correct, the Service Server will also catch the
rights that are authorized to Proxy Device B by Request Device A via parsing
the elements in the Authorization document."  I am not sure what that means,
precisely.  If you mean "will also cache the rights authorized on behalf of
Request Device A (via parsing ...) for use through Proxy Device B", then B
has no independent set of rights.  That could also be worded "will cache the
rights delegated by Request Device A (via parsing
...) to Proxy Device B".
        I assume that A is trying to delegate those rights specified in the
ServiceRights field.  What rights does B now have?  It could be the
intersection of A's configured rights with ServiceRights, or the
intersection of B's configured rights with ServiceRights, or the union of
B's pre-existing configured rights with the intersection of A's configured
rights and ServiceRights.

                Tom Gindin

To

Thanks for comments. 

-----Original Message-----

                Tom Gindin

To

Hi Aram,
Nice to hear you.

Hi Zhipeng,

Take care,
Aram

Stefan and all,

 .

Mobile:(+86) 13404162849