Consistency in Terms and Order in Key Format Section of KMIP Specification

[<Furlong_Judith@emc.com>]

When I was writing up the new section for the KMIP Usage Guide I
reviewed the key format definitions in the KMIP Specification (see
section 2.1.7).  I noticed that we are using different terminology when
describing DSA (section 2.1.7.2/3) keys and DH (section 2.7.1.6/7) and
that the order of parameters are slightly different between the two
sections.  Given that the same key could be used in both of these
algorithms it may make some since to make these two sections consistent
with one another.

Here is a summary of the discrepancies between the two section....

*	In sections 2.1.7.2/3 in the text below the tables we refer to Q
as the prime divisor while in sections 2.1.7.6/7 in the text below the
tables we refer to Q as the prime factor.  We should standardize upon
one term either divisor or factor and use it in both sections.
*	In sections 2.1.7.6/7 in the text below the tables please change
'P is the prime, ..." to 'P is the prime modulus,...' to make these
sections consistent with section 2.1.7.2/3 
*	In Table 10 the order of key components is P, Q, G, X while in
Table 14 the order of key components is P, G, Q, J, X -- I would
recommend that we change the order in Table 14 to P, Q, G, J, X and the
text below Table 14 should be reorder in the same manner.
*	In Table 11 the order of key components is P, Q, G, Y while in
Table 15 the order of key components is P, G, Q, J, X -- I would
recommend that we change the order in Table 15 to P, Q, G, J, Y and the
text below Table 14 should be reorder in the same manner.


Also one other comment on Section 2.1.7.11 (ECDH Public Key) -- in the
text below the table we have a reference to FIPS 186-3 -- Given that
this document does not describe ECDH I'd suggest removing the text in
parentheses.

Judy

Judith Furlong | Principal Product Manager | EMC Product Security Office
| RSA -The Security Division of EMC | t: 508 249 3698 | e:
Furlong_Judith@emc.com