[foaf-protocols] dtls + DNSsec + FOAF+SSL + google + Dane
kidehen at openlinksw.com
Sun Dec 12 22:18:18 CET 2010
On 12/12/10 11:44 AM, peter williams wrote:
> If the incubator project is to attract the interest of the TLS types,
> as sought, it has to be on grounds other than: isn't the semweb/foaf
> so special that you all come flock to our shores begging us for the
> implications of its special relativity that facilitate scalable
> identity management for all. If foaf theory was that special, that
> would have happened by now.
> As it stands, the next big think in the commercial web is probably
> going to be microsoft cloud-hosting activeDirectory instances for all
> comers, much as they added sql instance hosting. Google/Yahoo +
> internet2/USG websso/trust-policy crowd are trying to compete against
> ldaps with signed-XRDs, profiling the old XRDS/XRI protocol to meet
> web2.0 culture - much as netscape updated IETF's ldapv1 into ldapv3
> - enabling (paradoxically) microsoft's AD to go mainstream. All these
> cloud hosted images of "zones" and partitions of classes/attributes
> work of course with multi-mastering, replication and caching. The
> local LAN can also host a blade in the edge router at home, which
> supports either a multi-mastered image of the zone/partition, or
> locally-resigned secondary resources (more likely, using
> suitably-designed counter-signature technology). The technology to do
> all this is here, and economic in about 1 more year (once the wifi
> router's USB ports convert the router into a home "blade servers").
> Im not sure why you think a webid with IP address is a world "without
> DNS". Each IP address is just a reverse-DNS name.
Because it is.
I can have <http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this> or
IP Address + "#this" with similar effect re. access to my structured
profile en route to locating a public key post successful TLS/SSL
handshake. DNS is just an option. No rule exists for the shape and form
of my WebID bar resolution to a structured profile that's associated
with public key.
2. http://kingsley.idehen.net/dataspace/person/kidehen#this .
Above are very basic examples. I can also have alternative schemes in
the mix e.g. acct: or mailto: via WebFinger etc..
> Its bound to the name at the ISP, when authorizing the flow of IP
> packets onto the public net. Consumer PCs using broadband don't get
> any choice whether this name exists or not, or whether its published
> (or what records exist binding that name at time t to the very real
> ATM path over the local loop from ISP to the uniquely-identified DSL
> modem ASIC in the particular router).
Yes, but it doesn't introduce a DNS dependency that breaks the system.
Also note, IPv6 is around the corner, thus raw ip address WebIDs only
get better, and extend to other Things re. burgeoning Internet of Things.
> I think of FOAF (the project) as distinct from semweb generally, as it
> assume everyone hosts their own [named\addressed] website, on their
> own access point.
It doesn't make that assumption. It just delivers a vocabulary for
> That is, it's the opposite of centralizing huge triple stores in a
> google or Microsoft cloud - which divorces folks from control over
> their own data.
It enables the above e.g. each individual owning a Data Space. Then
applying ACLs to objects in said space courtesy of WebID and WebID protocol.
> In the true FOAF space, one has to harmonize that political theory
> with trends that make it PRACTICAL for grandma now to run her own
> website hosting her foaf card (and its got to be no harder than the
> tech installing the home DSL modem talking ATM to the ISP, while also
> setting up the other ATM path to the digital TV content provider....)
We're there. Just need to deliver the product to Grandma and others in
palatable form :-)
> *From:*foaf-protocols-bounces at lists.foaf-project.org
> [mailto:foaf-protocols-bounces at lists.foaf-project.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Kingsley Idehen
> *Sent:* Sunday, December 12, 2010 7:55 AM
> *To:* foaf-protocols at lists.foaf-project.org
> *Subject:* Re: [foaf-protocols] dtls + DNSsec + FOAF+SSL + google + Dane
> On 12/12/10 1:22 AM, Peter Williams wrote:
> Assuming FOAF+SSL does have the strategic goal of migrating to DNSsec,
> I think I'm starting to see where that IETF WG (dane) would fit into
> an W3C incubation project -- which focuses more on the FOAF side of
> FOAF+SSL (assuming dane would work on a supporting class of
> DTLS+DNS+zone concepts that specifically support huge numbers of
> semweb clients dereffing countless webids).
> WebID protocol (nee. FOAF+SSL), isn't migrating to DNSsec.
> DNSsec is a complimentary effort at best.
> WebID works without DNS i.e. you can use a raw IP address in the
> absolute worst case. That said, "man in the middle" attacks don't
> really affect WebID since public key lookup (when de-referencing
> structured profile graph) will ultimately fail.
> Kingsley Idehen
> President& CEO
> OpenLink Software
> Weblog:http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen <http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/%7Ekidehen>
> Twitter/Identi.ca: kidehen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the foaf-protocols