On Thu, 27 Jul 1995 Jueneman(_at_)gte(_dot_)com wrote:
[Lots of stuff between Jueneman and Steve Crocker deleted]
As I said, I'm sympathetic to your development problems, but I believe those
are basically one-time growing pains. I could be convinced more easily if
someone would provide detailed information about the number of bytes of code
necessary to interpret the ASN.1 vs. some other approach, and the amount of
processing time required to decode a certificate compared to the digital
signature verification time. If it is more than 10% I would be quite
surprised,
and if it is less than 10% I don't think the processing overhead would be
worth worrying about, given the other advantages. In particular, considering
the more complex parsing that might otherwise be required, together with the
extensibility issue, this may be a question of pay me now or pay me later.
Well, people did provide you with information on the enormous amount
of code needed for what were, in some cases, only subsets of ASN.1.
But, of course, on being presented with the evidence you just seemed
to get annoyed that people were attacking X.509 since, after all, it's
The Standard.
Bob
--------------------------------
"Robert R. Jueneman" <Jueneman(_at_)gte(_dot_)com>
Staff Scientist, Wireless and Secure Systems Laboratory
GTE Laboratories, 40 Sylvan Road, Waltham, MA 02254
Waltham office: Voice: 1-617-466-2820, FAX: 1-617-466-2603
Telecommuting: Voice: 1-508-264-0485, FAX: 1-508-264-4165
Donald
=====================================================================
Donald E. Eastlake 3rd +1 508-287-4877(tel) dee(_at_)cybercash(_dot_)com
318 Acton Street +1 508-371-7148(fax)
dee(_at_)world(_dot_)std(_dot_)com
Carlisle, MA 01741 USA +1 703-620-4200(main office, Reston, VA)