Subject: LAAP performance issues

From: "Andy Dowling" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 1999 09:16:59 +0100

Hi Stephen, David

some suggestions on LAAP performance:

1. Batch LAAP requests. Perhaps the LAAPRequestMessage could be replaced
with
    a SEQUENCE of LAAPRequestMessage, so that a LRQ could request multiple
ACs
    with a single LAAP request? (The LRP would evaluate each
LAAPRequestMessage
    in the SEQUENCE individually). This could result in a saving of network
bandwidth in
    cases where a large volume of ACs is to be pulled over LAAP.

2.  Support for a "keep-alive" TCP connection between LRQ and LRP.
     One problem with this is that, at the socket layer, some LRP
implementations may
     timeout the socket after a couple of minutes of inactivity. Perhaps the
use of a "null"
     LAAP request could be used in order for the LRQ to force the connection
to stay
     alive at the socket layer. This seems like a strange idea, 'cos if the
LRP supports
     keep-alives then the LRP will set the to infinite lifetime anyway.
Nonetheless, comments
     on this would be appreciated....

Thanks,

Andy

-----
Andy Dowling
SSE (A Siemens Company)
Fitzwilliam Court, Leeson Close,
Dublin 2, Ireland

E-Mail:  [email-masked]
Web: http://www.sse.ie
Phone: +353 1 216 2021
Fax:   +353 1 216 2082

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 30 Oct 1999 15:00:52 -0400

The model in the draft doesn't explicitly restrict the model to be for
the
"never revoke" method in draft-ietf-pkix-ac509prof-01.txt.  Should we
add a new
request and response to support revocation or was it intended to use
OCSP to get
revocation information?

Cheers,

spt