pkcs11 — archive

[Chris Zimman]

> Mapping the on-the-wire protocol can be tricky, but people do it every day. You just need to ensure that you do the translation from the using system representation of ? ? > CK_ULONG to an on-the-wire representation to a server representation. And let's not even talk about how you deal with pointers in a network encoding! > I think that the network representation is out of the purview of this group mostly. It's not really a problem of wire mapping etc at all -- explain to me how I'm going to get a value that's stored as 64 bit into a 32 bit client. > How about: > > "Although the internal representation for a CK_ULONG may be 32 bits or longer, by convention, only the least significant 32 bits shall be used to represent PKCS11 data values > (with the one exception of the ~0UL value *sigh*). This permits a loss-less conversion from a CK_ULONG 32 bit value to a CK_ULONG 64 bit value and vice versa." > This wouldn't be a change to the headers or anything else, just a description of the convention used for assigning values so that reasonable choices can be made to do network > protocol design (or even VM to VM type calls). That's just basically saying CK_ULONG == uint32_t. Instead of trying to make kludges, let's just admit this was a mistake in the past and move on in the future. --Chris