On Thu, 9 Feb 1995 Jueneman(_at_)gte(_dot_)com wrote:
I don't care much one way or the other. Ned, at least, has expressed the
opinion that PEM, MIME, and e-mail are all likely to be integrated in a single
application,
Definitely. This is my goal too. But it doesn't necessarily have to be all
done with the same protocol. It is the UA's responsibility to hide such
details. Look at the Web: it integrates http, ftp, gopher, wais, and half
a dozen other things all into the same coherent whole. The protocols may
be different, but the user doesn't notice or care because the UA takes care
of the protocols behind the scenes. Http would probably eventually dominate,
but there will always be a need for specialist protocols. e.g. a live
video protocol.
For certificate retrieval only, I'm happy directly looking up either an
e-mail name type of DN or a "regular" DN without browsing. My SUGGESTION
would be that we use an e-mail based retrieval mechanisms rather that a
direct socket approach, just so we can support the significant number of
users that do have email but don't have TCP/IP, but I won't arm wrestle
anyone over this.
Sure. I say we need both. Focusing on a socket protocol won't kill us.
Writing e-mail gateways to TCP/IP protocols is a time-honoured tradition.
Ftpmail, gophermail, webmail, etc, etc, etc. My gut feeling those is that
within the next 5 years, anyone who wants direct access to TCP/IP will be
able to have it. Those who just have e-mail will probably have it by
choice so that, say, they can save money on their Internet bills.
Actually, I was thinking of accounting for directory services, even if it is
only a penny per lookup.
I personally don't think this would fly for a second. A much better model
would be the Yellow Pages. Every year I receive a mound of paper on my
doorstep but I don't pay for all that paper. The companies that are listed
pay to get space in the Yellow Pages each year. Charging ordinary people a
small yearly rental for their certificate is also possible. Certificates
have time limits built in, so they'll need to be regenerated periodically.
Of course, there will always be those who think that paying money for such
a service is evil (e.g. me :-) ). In which case, I expect that the slack
will be taken up by volunteer-run CA's and "guerilla" CA's.
One needs to be careful of "only a penny per lookup". At 20 to 50 messages
per day, that's not much. At 200 to 500 messages per day, that's highway
robbery. With intelligent agents, secretaries, and the merging between
USENET and mailing lists, I fully expect to be processing 200 to 500
messages per _hour_ by the end of the century.
Cheers,
Rhys.
--
Rhys Weatherley, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia.
E-mail: rhys(_at_)fit(_dot_)qut(_dot_)edu(_dot_)au "net.maturity is knowing
when NOT to followup"