W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-xkms@w3.org > February 2002

Re: WAP issues with XKMS [was RE: Mobile XKMS clients]

From: Ed Simon <edsimon@xmlsec.com>
Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2002 21:30:13 -0500
Message-ID: <000701c1be6d$867c2480$3900a8c0@DJQC7111>
To: <www-xkms@w3.org>
Alex wrote
> 1) Because its not possible (and perhaps impossible) to support a general
> purpose XML parser and more importantly a full XML dsig implementation on
> constrained devices, it would be necessary to create a dsig profile for
> messaging.  For example, is full XPath support necessary?

Individual protocols can certainly decide not to use XPath or other features
of XML Signature; indeed the XML Signature schema specifically allows great
flexibility in subclassing.   However, all protocols, no matter how they
subclass XML Signature, must however ensure they are using XML Signature in
a secure and sufficiently interoperable manner.

I'm interested in the question about determining what degree of XML
processing will be available on "constrained" devices.   I'm not
knowledgeable enough in this area but it seems to me that there are so many
XML technologies that will be desired on such devices (eg. SVG, Web
services,...) that it would make sense (even in a constrained environment)
to have a reasonably adequate level of generic XML processing available.

> 2) The size of a signed XKMS message is to large, leading to bandwidth
> issues.  For example, a typical signed XKMS Validate response can run
> 2.5K.  On some networks this would cost the user between 7 and 10 cents!
> (Data from a major European operator)   This seems to have been the major
> issue with the vendors and caused them to stick to their smaller
> structures and to consider ASN.1 based protocols such as OCSP for
> instead of going with XKMS.

Again, I'm no expert in wireless but 4cents per kilobyte sounds strange to
me as a design parameter.  I thought 3G wireless was good for say, at least
10 kB/second.  Does that mean on 3G, I'd be spending 40 cents/second,
$24/minute!, on a 3G network!!!

Received on Monday, 25 February 2002 21:31:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 23:07:17 UTC