IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] Review of draft-sorce-krbwg-general-pac-02

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Tue, 05 July 2011 22:24 UTC

Return-Path: <ietf-krb-wg-bounces@lists.anl.gov>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2BBB221F88E7 for <ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:24:44 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.22
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.22 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.757, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nYyz7ZPwDp-m for <ietfarch-krb-wg-archive@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.anl.gov (mailhost.anl.gov [130.202.113.50]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 687C421F888F for <krb-wg-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:24:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailhost.anl.gov (mailhost.anl.gov [130.202.113.50]) by localhost.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C4F45B; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:24:42 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from lists.anl.gov (katydid.it.anl.gov [146.137.96.32]) by mailhost.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id B86757C; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:24:41 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from katydid.it.anl.gov (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by lists.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 921342CC0FD; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:24:41 -0500 (CDT)
X-Original-To: ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
Delivered-To: ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
Received: from mailrelay.anl.gov (mailrelay.anl.gov [130.202.101.22]) by lists.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 775D92CC0B7 for <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:24:40 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by localhost.it.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 61CB27CC0DE; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:24:40 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mailrelay.anl.gov ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mailrelay.anl.gov [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 08673-01; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:24:40 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from mailgateway.anl.gov (mailgateway.anl.gov [130.202.101.28]) by mailrelay.anl.gov (Postfix) with ESMTP id 449137CC0CA for <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 17:24:40 -0500 (CDT)
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AhMBAJ2OE07QYYTKkGdsb2JhbAAzChYQhDKjQhwBAQEBCQkNBxQDIrA2i2iDEI1lAQSBK4N/gQyHQ4p3jCM8gyBV
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,481,1304312400"; d="scan'208";a="62926457"
Received: from caiajhbdccac.dreamhost.com (HELO homiemail-a29.g.dreamhost.com) ([208.97.132.202]) by mailgateway.anl.gov with ESMTP; 05 Jul 2011 17:24:39 -0500
Received: from homiemail-a29.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a29.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5098067406A for <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=cryptonector.com; h=mime-version :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:cc: content-type; q=dns; s=cryptonector.com; b=VK/TInDA/JvZ0rPeeEyOl IxHoovGwKMH0IJcoWD7i3EKlTn20SyVNbwPCbKTqITI+W4zBeCQ/wVI3pTqN/CHW tt+Zvj5t9GfVv/djIZIAm97RWvS6b/BUiumwDwwSZwb7fsn0Jx2ize9q55pnuxHc zd51aidDvwZd/SJvOOOo14=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=cryptonector.com; h= mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from :to:cc:content-type; s=cryptonector.com; bh=w00gudBibrc6HLuxBVpH ggQdo3k=; b=yyRZEO344nmlFUSo28+006TFD8ZKUYnoQIE6V11+icKztooOrykl uiqTpxdRJjXoS8IZ8QFnQ/51/YsfOvSM8ASTpSKw4L9V0gFxTSYNEqLcdhV7AEYD Oq+DY7hc1Fuhq4BDgiX5o4DsVSYSWAW5aBd/ry/ihwPJOlicLr2TkMY=
Received: from mail-pv0-f175.google.com (mail-pv0-f175.google.com [74.125.83.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a29.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 37792674060 for <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:24:39 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by pvf24 with SMTP id 24so6317974pvf.20 for <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 15:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.44.103 with SMTP id d7mr9369090pbm.119.1309904678800; Tue, 05 Jul 2011 15:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.68.50.231 with HTTP; Tue, 5 Jul 2011 15:24:38 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <CA38F5E5.F49F%cantor.2@osu.edu>
References: <CAK3OfOh6qqMMCZtmAO3fsG9+DFj51toepMx=U_79K3CjDykZ_A@mail.gmail.com> <CA38F5E5.F49F%cantor.2@osu.edu>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2011 17:24:38 -0500
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOiS0fPaQZSY5ba-AuhYdrF5x_RdggwLdTMXbtqBx61xag@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: "Cantor, Scott E." <cantor.2@osu.edu>
X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at frigga.it.anl.gov
Cc: "ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov" <ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>
Subject: Re: [Ietf-krb-wg] Review of draft-sorce-krbwg-general-pac-02
X-BeenThere: ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a list for the IETF Kerberos Working Group. {WORLDPUB, EXTERNAL}" <ietf-krb-wg.lists.anl.gov>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/options/ietf-krb-wg>, <mailto:ietf-krb-wg-request@lists.anl.gov?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://lists.anl.gov/pipermail/ietf-krb-wg>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-krb-wg-request@lists.anl.gov?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg>, <mailto:ietf-krb-wg-request@lists.anl.gov?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Errors-To: ietf-krb-wg-bounces@lists.anl.gov
Sender: ietf-krb-wg-bounces@lists.anl.gov

On Tue, Jul 5, 2011 at 4:14 PM, Cantor, Scott E. <cantor.2@osu.edu> wrote:
> On 7/5/11 5:07 PM, "Nico Williams" <nico@cryptonector.com> wrote:
>>
>>What's the difference?
>
> Space mainly, which is what you were worried about.
>
> I could show you what lossless XML -> JSON looks like as compared to
> actually expressing the same content directly. I'm sure it would be
> similar here.

Just to be clear I think you thought I was proposing an ASN.1 encoding
that applies to any XML, whatever its schema, while you're proposing
that the schema be mapped to an ASN.1 module and the data re-encoded?
Correct?  But I had the latter in mind (I'm not that familiar with
FastInfoSet, so it's possible I misinterpreted the nature of
FastInfoSet).

In any case, I think it's safe to say that we agree that the encoding
ought to be one of the traditional ASN.1 encoding rules, specifically
DER, for two reasons: a) it's less chatty, b) it's what Simo and other
implementors have tools to work with.

Nico
--
_______________________________________________
ietf-krb-wg mailing list
ietf-krb-wg@lists.anl.gov
https://lists.anl.gov/mailman/listinfo/ietf-krb-wg

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email