- From: John Boyer <JBoyer@PureEdge.com>
- Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2002 08:44:20 -0800
- To: "merlin" <merlin@baltimore.ie>
- Cc: <reagle@w3.org>, <w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org>
Hi Merlin, If there's some way you could run those tests, I'd certainly appreciate knowing the outcome. The concern I have is that, right now in XFDL, our logical equivalent to an XPath transform runs in microseconds, even on XML that could be a megabyte in size. There's no way we could tolerate a hundred-fold increase in run-times on server side CPUs just to use XPath for signature filtering. Even if we have to modify the XPath transform (or add a new transform) because of some unexpected lapse in real-world usability, it would be far better to bite the bullet and make that change than it would be to essentially lose the ability to do document subsetting because of speed problems. Most are interested in being able to efficiently specify a subtree to sign, but I assure you that it would be a mistake to not have equivalent efficiencies for exclusive logic signature filter (e.g. sign everything except a given subtree or subtrees). The good news is that, if we do end up with some design change necessity, it would be relatively easy on implementers to accommodate both needs. I just want to make sure everyone remains aware of both needs in any such considerations. Joseph, do you have any opinion on the ability to tolerate a change at this point? Cheers, John Boyer PureEdge Solutions Inc. -----Original Message----- From: merlin [mailto:merlin@baltimore.ie] Sent: Thursday, January 24, 2002 8:00 PM To: John Boyer Cc: reagle@w3.org; w3c-ietf-xmldsig@w3.org Subject: Re: History: Question on C14N list of nodes instead of subtrees r/JBoyer@pureedge.com/2002.01.24/16:12:13 >I'm not averse to more transforms; it would be useful to get an idea for >how much motivation there might be to make changes at this point. My >position is that > > if the problem is important enough (e.g. good idea but too slow >in a frequently occuring scenario), and > if it is easy for the implementations to be tweaked, > then let's fix it before REC. > >So, before we stop the presses and re-architect anything, it would be >useful to find out exactly how important the problem is. By this I mean >the mundane question of how frequently occuring the scenario is, but >also the more interesting question of whether the slowness is really an >inherent limitation we are hitting with XPath or just an implementation >limitation. I don't think that we need to change the spec or anything; we can just throw up a new doc like exclusive c14n, or even just add to the extra algorithms doc. I may try running some tests if I have the time. Merlin ------------------------------------------------------------------------ ----- Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct, special, indirect or consequential damages arising from alteration of the contents of this message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on. This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including computer viruses. http://www.baltimore.com
Received on Friday, 25 January 2002 11:45:01 UTC