Ray,
I'm puzzled by your statement about a problem with residential
PCAs and CAs with regard to name subordination. I had hoped that one
of the many note I sent a week ago, when I finallly crawled out of my
mail hole, had clarified how residential PCAs were supposed to work.
The "trick" is for a residential PCA to establish placeholder CAs for
appropriate geographical CAs, e.g., states under C=US. That way the
name subordination rule still applies since users can be registered
under a CA with an appropriate name. I reproduced the Paul Revere
example from 1422 to illustrate this point. Is there a residual
problem?
Steve