On Wed, 17 Dec 2014, Nico Williams wrote: >> > >I think so. This is really for Jan to answer. Maybe the Solaris >> > >libpkcs11 should just ensure a meaningful (stable and distinct) slot >> > >label. If that could be done then slot-id could be excluded here. >> > > >> > >Jan? >> > >> > for example, metaslot on Solaris is always 0 so slot-id=0 >> > would be reliable there to use to access the soft token. Jan. >> >> And there is no other URI that could identify that slot without the slot-id >> attribute? i.e. pkcs11:slot-description=metaslot > >I would think so. Maybe Jan misunderstood my question; he certainly >didn't answer it. I did, I'm sorry. The description is distinct, "Sun Metaslot" and it's defacto stable but what I wanted to say was that I don't think it is about whether we find a way not to use the attribute since we could probably do without other attributes as well, I still think that if we add slot-description and slot-manufacturer, we should add slot-id since there are situations where it may be useful. I will draft new text including the slot-id attribute first and send it here but will not file it yet. thank you for reviewing this last minute proposals. J. -- Jan Pechanec <jan.pechanec@xxxxxxxxxx>