W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org > April to June 2001

Re: Poll on Exclusive Canonicalization

From: Thomas Maslen <maslen@dstc.edu.au>
Date: Fri, 15 Jun 2001 17:46:40 +1000
Message-Id: <200106150746.f5F7kU624931@piglet.dstc.edu.au>
To: w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org
> With respect to the issue of excluding ancestor context from the canonical 
> form of a signature[1], the WG should pursue option:
> 
> 1. Specify the exclusive canonicalization as part of the non-normative (nor 
>    required to implement) dsig-more specification [2].
>
> 2. Specify the exclusive canonicalization as part of the normative 
>    xmldsig-core  as proposed in [3] (but with the URIs of [4]) as [REQUIRED, 
>    RECOMMENDED, OPTIONAL]. (This option requires interoperable implementation 
>    of this feature before xmldsig advances.)

Speaking for the JCSI gang at DSTC:

We believe that a significant percentage of candidate xmldsig applications 
suffer from the c14n variable-context issue.  Given this, we believe that
for xmldsig to be usable and interoperable, it is worthwhile for xmldsig to 
specify an interoperable c14n approach that resolves this issue, despite the
effect of this on the standardization schedule.

In other words, our preference is for option 2.  

Also, in the interests of interoperability, RECOMMENDED (or ideally REQUIRED)
would be preferable to OPTIONAL.

Thomas Maslen
DSTC
Received on Friday, 15 June 2001 03:46:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.29 : Thursday, 13 January 2005 12:10:13 GMT