Hi Richard and Wei, hi all, Following up on the discussion, I would like to synthesize the core architectural boundaries we must address before WGLC:
- Serialization Layer: Relying on third-party parser heuristics to secure a highly exposed, high-volume wire interface remains a structural vulnerability. In high-performance/high- reliability (HP/HR) environments—utilizing architectures like the latest IBM Telum processors—unregulated JSON parsing under volumetric load risks blocking complete cores and breaking line-rate streaming. - Deterministic Guardrails: To resolve these constraints, the specification should structurally enforce a strictly flat representation (hard nesting limit of d=1 or d=2). This ensures sequential, stream-oriented processing with a constant memory footprint per connection. - Key Lifecycles: Infrastructure-level key rotation in the DNS must remain strictly separated from transaction-level signature validity. To preserve cryptographic deniability on archived data stores, the protocol layout should discourage lifetime validation properties from bleeding into transient transport metadata. I look forward to your architectural perspectives on how to best codify these structural boundaries. Regardss, Timo [snip] -- Timo Gerke Hamburg, Germany "If you think technology can solve your security problems then you don't understand the problems and you don't understand the technology." -- Bruce Schneier
OpenPGP_0x9F03DF9F597BF31E.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Ietf-dkim mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
