Re: [dss] Core issues

[Trevor Perrin <trevp@trevp.net>]

At 02:25 PM 4/1/2004 -0500, Rich Salz wrote:
>>>Could we fit all DSS messages into the XKMS request/response types?
>>I'm not sure exactly what you mean?
>
>Make all request and response messages derive from the 
>RequestAbstractType, Result, and PendingRequest types defined in the xkms 
>schema.

That would add a lot of "stuff" to the protocol:
  - optional <ds:Signature> that can cover the request (why not use XKMS?)
  - optional opaque client data to be returned by the server (?)
  - URI of the target web service (?)
  - optional nonce (doesn't the Id serve this purpose?)
  - <RespondWith> which we'd have to re-interpret to say "respond with a 
signature", "respond with a validation result"..
  - Some "extended protocol mechanisms":
    - aysnchronous requests/responses
    - 2-phase requests/responses (to prevent DoS by a lightweight 
authentication)
    - compound requests/responses

I'd rather not add so much new stuff at this late date.  Even if I agreed 
with or understood all of it, which I'm not sure I do.

Trevor