IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ace] Group Communication Security Disagreements

Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> Mon, 25 July 2016 14:23 UTC

Return-Path: <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ace@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4D4CF12D8C9 for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 07:23:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.888
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.888 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-1.287, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 57cOpRt5oPAv for <ace@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 07:23:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.15]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2426D12D8C2 for <Ace@ietf.org>; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 07:23:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.10.131] ([195.149.223.151]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx003) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MI4yc-1bSFow3s9W-003sEa; Mon, 25 Jul 2016 16:23:41 +0200
To: Derek Atkins <derek@ihtfp.com>
References: <57909032.10809@gmx.net> <sjmfuqx6bul.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
From: Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net>
Openpgp: id=071A97A9ECBADCA8E31E678554D9CEEF4D776BC9
Message-ID: <579620EB.8020400@gmx.net>
Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 16:23:39 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.8.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <sjmfuqx6bul.fsf@securerf.ihtfp.org>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg="pgp-sha512"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="smnk1xfRDrkVSGILEMPj9v2wprIeIAGLT"
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:HaSH88/MDkfN85JxLAqimIbd4+2Wiq2QXpPKjPrD4aTYlkmu8zJ jUH/ZJK09Xhl4wYayOkNFHi1Hd1neeD2SzhddP4OEmrIVruWa+4FSRlkZOBucfpARf6Q20C qP2WB5XQPbR3lRfiGlBABhga9T6TjDTiaTyFYpNvVqXUNIuRmJw46IyBci89O5Je6eXDfOc HeB5yktWJSnfdss+6ltyw==
X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:Rogy9HvaqKY=:0pwrT0JNR4NThcIJu3kXkh q4gnfvRkKR0uz+IdbhAgBI5soyESB1znWPgNNT84HlsxBZcmloADOz/b8M+3uIMVbqzZFDPQP alQKReIiqRJwDAVKRotyRRSm0T/sSyFUFDSzHMN8ryS7vbHuKnY6QmJHlgYDkbmMe4Qf1LwUd 49aLjCKlXpPBTW1PQYfSyxFsjEQuatOBNSmc5V7QWJ+nlfzYbz88po4U/vKSdHd5/1y1RZ49g DLKNFbZI4oD4fvB32y7qAosVsBxAtvhuM7puHOzQ0Xc6q2HT6h5kh1NL8tsbG6YCe7Fjg4xOT S9U+WVecjBRalEs/QMjVf0RQWmcjWNFD5T+Z1Qmoz+fGkEPvO+Gwjc12Wsmb8qP1kl3Z5n5LZ +LXTEVokiIevA4PNYxe5P1/S1vK9xM55bjRF8KY+/98JVwVTgB1qn5JSls7vt/3OYNnBdpPQG rgFUg8RELzCcYehv4MHq1Jv+Vdjhr0rAZuoxIuZfaAPwwK9qbynV2OYdPlKPSZNer1qbfc9sE 1WE/l4Tqjadq6a2V3YGjj7TH7wFY6SR/wUtPx2EDU5qKTHIe2jGZPMSjDzMDpvFoAyhuxJkb6 PWMOIOYs318GWqY8HsJz28SwbY3qxIuD1gI5myHur49T0MHPmRiLSNNwKAzNGwm2FRO+RQF4L y9+nPyr/J6io1C4Wq9CY2dD1xldSzCS+B3Gd7LPxPNwIqDAi+ys2vVUqAd54aWZpoaTlOJDGe oW+Mhh4gS/oiZRFYnEOkVDPj5ERUdk6MXVo8mGF+x8EzPyLhCYQkKiOTjQ0=
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ace/mNqXZwvTO_t-jmKnFdZxRf-9rU4>
Cc: "Ace@ietf.org" <Ace@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [Ace] Group Communication Security Disagreements
X-BeenThere: ace@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Authentication and Authorization for Constrained Environments \(ace\)" <ace.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ace/>
List-Post: <mailto:ace@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ace>, <mailto:ace-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2016 14:23:55 -0000

This is copy-and-past error. Sorry!

The correct wording is: "For the ECDSA secp256r1 verify
operation it took 205 msec on a Cortex-M7 running at 216 MHz."

Ciao
Hannes

On 07/25/2016 04:17 PM, Derek Atkins wrote:
> Hannes,
> 
> Hannes Tschofenig <hannes.tschofenig@gmx.net> writes:
> 
>> * What are the implications for power consumption?
>>
>> Here is my initial impression regarding the second aspect from a
>> performance analysis I ran on an LPC1768. It took 458 msec to do a
>> verify computation with optimization enabled* for a secp256r1 curve.
>> The LPC 1768 demo board uses a ARM Cortex-M3 CPU running at 96MHz.
>>
>> I also did a performance test with the STM DISCO-F746NG, which uses
>> a Cortex-M7 CPU running at 216 MHz. For the ECDSA secp256r1 verify
>> operation it took 10, 205 msec.
> 
> Is this Ten Thousand Two Hundred Five msec (e.g. 10+ seconds)?  Or is
> this Ten decimal Two Hundred Five msec?
> 
> -derek
>

v2.28.0 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status