• To: "mbatsis@h..." <mbatsis@h...>
• Subject: Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
• From: Rich Salz <rsalz@d...>
• Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 18:30:51 -0400 (EDT)
• Cc: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• In-reply-to: <200210080059.13172.mbatsis@n...>

> I cetainly would not accept such an authority. I'd preffer distributed
> metadata bundled with the subject resources.

The problem is trust, from a security/crypto viewpoint.  If you have a
distributed directory (which, I agree, is basically what you want),
handling trust becomes difficult.  We could look to DNSSEC as a deployment
model, but ... unh ... it ain't deployed. :(
        /r$

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>

• References:
  • Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
    • From: "m batsis" <mbatsis@n...>

• Prev by Date: Re: heritage (was Re: SGML on the Web)
• Next by Date: Re: SGML on the Web
• Previous by thread: Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
• Next by thread: Re: Using RDDL as a Distributed Registry Architecture
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread