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

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

From: Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2002 13:08:14 +0000
Message-ID: <3C7B88BE.52EDCAB3@baltimore.ie>
To: Ed Simon <edsimon@xmlsec.com>
CC: www-xkms@w3.org


On the first issue - have we any examples of a constrained-xmldisg


Ed Simon wrote:
> 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
> about
> > 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
> proprietary
> > structures and to consider ASN.1 based protocols such as OCSP for
> validation
> > 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!!!
> Ed

Stephen Farrell         				   
Baltimore Technologies,   tel: (direct line) +353 1 881 6716
39 Parkgate Street,                     fax: +353 1 881 7000
Dublin 8.                mailto:stephen.farrell@baltimore.ie
Ireland                             http://www.baltimore.com
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2002 08:08:18 UTC

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