Re: SMD: Restriction of XML DSIG parameter space ...

+1

interoperability for ENUM tokens was hard to achieve, even with this specified

thanks
Anthony


________________________________________
From: [email protected] [[email protected]] on behalf of Alexander Mayrhofer [[email protected]]
Sent: 27 May 2013 15:39
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: Otmar Lendl
Subject: [provreg] SMD: Restriction of XML DSIG parameter space ...

All,

looking at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-lozano-tmch-smd-02, the draft currently doesn't seem to restrict the set of XML Signature parameters to be used. The signature and normalization algorithm examples look surprisingly similar to RFC5105 (written by my colleague Otmar Lendl back in 2006/2007).

During his journey to implement the signature technoloy in our ENUM registry software, he found out that some options in XML DSIG (particularly the normalization options) are rather cumbersome and error-prone (AFAIR whitespace changes created by the validating XML parser  triggering validation errors, etc.). Based on this practical experience, he restricted the parameter range for XML DSIG in http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc5105#section-3 of RFC5105, in order to increase interopability. The concept described in RFC5105 has since been validated in implementations of a few ENUM registry installations (servers), as well as their ENUM registrars (clients).

Since SMD essentially uses the same technology, i'm proposing that the authors also consider restricting the parameter range of XML DSIG in order to reduce implementation effort, and increase interopability.

Comments?

Alex

_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg
_______________________________________________
provreg mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/provreg