draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2511bis
Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com> Tue, 29 April 2003 15:56 UTC
Received: from above.proper.com (mail.proper.com [208.184.76.45]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id LAA28744 for <pkix-archive@lists.ietf.org>; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 11:56:57 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from above.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by above.proper.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with ESMTP id h3TDsVi2091065 for <ietf-pkix-bks@above.proper.com>; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 06:54:31 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by above.proper.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.9/Submit) id h3TDsVqd091064 for ietf-pkix-bks; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 06:54:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: above.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from woodstock.binhost.com (woodstock.binhost.com [207.228.252.5]) by above.proper.com (8.12.8p1/8.12.8) with SMTP id h3TDsUi2091057 for <ietf-pkix@imc.org>; Tue, 29 Apr 2003 06:54:30 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from housley@vigilsec.com)
Received: (qmail 15591 invoked by uid 0); 29 Apr 2003 13:53:39 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO Russ-Laptop.vigilsec.com) (206.246.84.113) by woodstock.binhost.com with SMTP; 29 Apr 2003 13:53:39 -0000
Message-Id: <5.2.0.9.2.20030429094548.037c5ea8@mail.binhost.com>
X-Sender: housley@mail.binhost.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.2.0.9
Date: Tue, 29 Apr 2003 09:53:45 -0400
To: ietf-pkix@imc.org
From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
Subject: draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2511bis
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-pkix/mail-archive/>
List-ID: <ietf-pkix.imc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-pkix-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
-- Registration Info in CRMF
id-regInfo OBJECT
IDENTIFIER ::= { id-pkip id-regInfo(2) }
id-regInfo-asciiPairs
id-regInfo-utf8Pairs
OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-regInfo 1 }
--with syntax
OCTET STRING
UTF8STRING
id-regInfo-certReq OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { id-regInfo 2 }
--with syntax CertRequest
First, I am concerned about the change in the semantics associated with an OID that was assigned a long time ago. This could lead to interoperability issues. Why would we change the semantics of an existing OID instead of assigning a new OID.Second, this change does not show up in the ASN.1 module. Why are the OIDs not part of the ASN.1 module?
Russ
- draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2511bis Russ Housley
- RE: draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2511bis Carlisle Adams
- RE: draft-ietf-pkix-rfc2511bis Russ Housley