Fingerprint (was: RE: Missed Items)
"Gareth Richards" <[email protected]> Fri, 14 Dec 2001 12:54:12 -0000
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.sacred |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
The reason the client would check is to reduce the number of credential downloads. If the fingerprint isn't used then the credentials would have to be downloaded each time to ensure the current version is used. The fingerprint could also be of use in detecting conflicts. For example, download to platform A, download to platform B, update from B, update from A. The server could detect a conflict on the second upload. > > > I think this is possibly ok, but I want to think about it for > a bit (I'm a bit wary of (c) below - can't see why a client > would bother checking?) > > Stephen. > > > 1. Fingerprint > > The I-D has a LastModified element in the credential format > (section 3.2). > > The proposal is that this be replaced with a fingerprint which would be > > used as follows: > > > > a) Returned by the server in the upload response (Framework > section 5.1). > > b) Optionally sent with the credentials in an upload request. > If it is not > > included then the credentials are replaced unconditionally. > > c) Optionally sent along with the credential selector in a download > > request(Framework section 5.2). > > > > The intention is that if the client has locally cached > credentials then it > > could use the fingerprint to conditionally download > credentials if they are > > newer. > > -- > ____________________________________________________________ > Stephen Farrell > Baltimore Technologies, tel: (direct line) +353 1 881 6716 > 39 Parkgate Street, fax: +353 1 881 7000 > Dublin 8. mailto:[email protected] > Ireland http://www.baltimore.com >