ietf-dkim
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful - Correction

2006-03-22 07:48:39
Oy vey! Urghhhhhhhhhh! Correction! I meant there is "no doubt" in my mind.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Hector Santos" <hsantos(_at_)santronics(_dot_)com>

Current model:

  TCO(DKIM1) =  TCO(HASH-BODY)+ TCO(HASH-HDR) + TCO(SSP)

The order of the processing above is important.

The more optimal model when considering order is:

  TCO(DKIM2) =  TCO(SSP) + TCO(HASH-HDR) + TCO(HASH-BODY)

There is [NO] doubt in my mind:

  TCO(DKIM2) <= TCO(DKIM1)

The reasons are straight forward:

  - SSP processing offers short circuiting of remaining
    processing overhead

  - HASH-HDR processing offers short circuiting of remaining
    processing overhead

and so on.

-- 
Hector Santos, Santronics Software, Inc.
http://www.santronics.com



_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html