IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem

Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com> Tue, 29 October 2019 09:54 UTC

Return-Path: <mbj@tail-f.com>
X-Original-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: netmod@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B5C9F12016E for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:54:20 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id A3LH17gAWvn5 for <netmod@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:54:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.tail-f.com (mail.tail-f.com [46.21.102.45]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 86FD512010F for <netmod@ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 02:54:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (unknown [173.38.220.41]) by mail.tail-f.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A943E1AE04BD; Tue, 29 Oct 2019 10:54:18 +0100 (CET)
Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 10:53:49 +0100
Message-Id: <20191029.105349.2169510354890358887.mbj@tail-f.com>
To: randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu
Cc: netmod@ietf.org
From: Martin Bjorklund <mbj@tail-f.com>
In-Reply-To: <f508c9f9-8493-88dc-7468-edc8dbe11776@alumni.stanford.edu>
References: <0100016e0416c312-13b65019-1c32-4fc8-b8b2-f2b7cc591a00-000000@email.amazonses.com> <20191028.102216.1541488608391720310.mbj@tail-f.com> <f508c9f9-8493-88dc-7468-edc8dbe11776@alumni.stanford.edu>
X-Mailer: Mew version 6.8 on Emacs 25.2
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/netmod/aCkhFDhPGGGVjk4qNNF30E1qsKc>
Subject: Re: [netmod] x509c2n:cert-to-name problem
X-BeenThere: netmod@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: NETMOD WG list <netmod.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/netmod/>
List-Post: <mailto:netmod@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/netmod>, <mailto:netmod-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2019 09:54:21 -0000

Randy Presuhn <randy_presuhn@alumni.stanford.edu> wrote:
> Hi -
> 
> On 10/28/2019 2:22 AM, Martin Bjorklund wrote:
> ....
> > No, in many SMIv2 objects, a zero-length value is used for optional
> > nodes (due to the way the protocol (SNMP) works).
> 
> This comes as a complete surprise to me.  References?

I don't have any references at hand, so let me re-phrase:

  No, in many SMIv2 objects, a zero-length value is used for optional
  nodes.

(where "optional" means optional to set, not optional to implement)



/martin

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email