Subject: [KEYPROV] [issue17] PSKC: shall we use strong typed algorithm configuration data?

From: Mingliang Pei <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:58:41 +0000

New submission from Mingliang Pei <[email-masked]>:

When we specify SecretAlgorithm as one of the standard list, we should also 
allow associated algorithm configuration data. Currently, <DataType> allows any 
name that such an algorithm may use but isn't strongly typed. 

For each of these, we may provide a reserved list of attributes that we know 
the algorithm needs.

Philip Hoyer's comment:

I am not very much in favor of this because this will mean that the schema 
needs extending for a new algorithm. I believe it will be probably better to 
have algorithm name value pairs and profile definition a’ la PKCS#11 mechanism 
and associated attributes. I am happy to have some optional strongly typed 
attributes but we are again in the same discussion of what do we do if they are 
sensitive values and need to be encrypted. We can opt for having strongly XML  
schema types but one of the tenents of PSKC was that it should be able to parse 
the payload in a low computational power embedded device. Hence the receiving 
device will probably not be able to validate the incomeing data against the 
schema anyway. So maybe it rests on the shoulders of the issuer to make sure 
the values are correct.

----------
assignedto: mpei
messages: 32
nosy: keyprov, mpei
priority: feature
status: need-eg
title: PSKC: shall we use strong typed algorithm configuration data?

_________________________________________________________
KEYPROV Roundup Issue Tracker <[email-masked]>
<http://www.tschofenig.priv.at:8080/keyprov/issue17>
_________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________
KEYPROV mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/keyprov