SPDM Command Timing Advertisement for Efficient Attestation Sequencing
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Existing SPDM-based attestation systems lack the capability to provide apriori knowledge of minimum processing times for cryptographic and non-cryptographic operations, leading to inefficient command retries due to static response time expectations.
Innovation Solution
Implementing a mechanism in SPDM-enabled devices to advertise estimated response times for different types of commands, allowing requesters to make informed decisions about command timing.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If static response time expectations are used in SPDM-based attestation systems, then the system implementation is simple, but command processing efficiency deteriorates due to inefficient retries
Solution Approach 1:
The responder performs preliminary action by calculating and advertising its processing capacity information (including minimum processing times for cryptographic and non-cryptographic operations) to the requester before actual command execution. This allows the requester to pre-determine optimal command timing and retry intervals, eliminating the need for static response time expectations and improving command processing efficiency without adding significant system complexity.
2Productivity
If apriori knowledge of processing times is provided, then command sequencing efficiency is improved, but information transmission overhead increases
Solution Approach 1:
The invention extracts only the essential timing parameters (minimum processing times for cryptographic and non-cryptographic operations) from the responder's processing capacity information and transmits them to the requester. By selecting and transmitting only these specific critical parameters rather than complete processing capacity data, the system achieves improved command sequencing efficiency while minimizing information transmission overhead.
3Productivity
If dynamic timing adjustments are implemented based on processing capacity, then communication optimization is improved, but protocol complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The protocol implements dynamic timing adjustments through preliminary action by having the responder advertise its processing capacity information (including minimum processing times) before command execution. The requester then uses this pre-provided information to dynamically adjust command timing and retry intervals, achieving communication optimization without requiring complex real-time negotiation protocols, thus limiting protocol complexity increase.
Data Source
AI summary
According to embodiments of the present disclosure, systems and methods to advertise Security Protocol and Data Model (SPDM) command timing requirements are provided. According to one embodiment, an Information Handling System (IHS) includes a requester and a responder conforming to a SPDM specification in which the responder is configured with computer-executable logic to, in response to a request from a requester, generate an estimated amount of time to process a SPDM command, and send the estimated amount of time to the requester in response to the request. The requester may then wait the estimated amount of time between sending each of multiple ensuing commands to the responder.


