RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the removal of upper bound in X.509"
"Kemp, David P." <DPKemp@missi.ncsc.mil> Fri, 12 October 2007 19:14 UTC
Return-path: <owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org>
Received: from [10.91.34.44] (helo=ietf-mx.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgPxm-0002lB-La for pkix-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 15:14:22 -0400
Received: from balder-227.proper.com ([192.245.12.227]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IgPxd-0000sv-4o for pkix-archive@lists.ietf.org; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 15:14:18 -0400
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id l9CIEgmV073579 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:14:42 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5/Submit) id l9CIEgQk073578; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:14:42 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: balder-227.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-pkix@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from stingray.missi.ncsc.mil (stingray.missi.ncsc.mil [144.51.50.20]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id l9CIEf6D073567 for <ietf-pkix@imc.org>; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 11:14:42 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from DPKemp@missi.ncsc.mil)
Received: from Cerberus.missi.ncsc.mil (cerberus.missi.ncsc.mil [144.51.51.8]) by stingray.missi.ncsc.mil with SMTP id l9CIEa7e011545; Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:14:36 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from 144.51.60.33 by Cerberus.missi.ncsc.mil (InterScan VirusWall 6); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:14:36 -0400
Received: from EXCH.missi.ncsc.mil ([144.51.60.19]) by antigone.missi.ncsc.mil with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.3959); Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:14:35 -0400
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Subject: RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the removal of upper bound in X.509"
Date: Fri, 12 Oct 2007 14:14:35 -0400
Message-ID: <FA998122A677CF4390C1E291BFCF5989085414FA@EXCH.missi.ncsc.mil>
In-Reply-To: <p06240822c33533e1b00d@[192.168.1.3]>
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
Thread-Topic: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on the removal of upper bound in X.509"
Thread-Index: AcgM6CMUv38Kwxe1S2msNxc8hziXeAAElABw
References: <4707E6DA.1070703@cs.tcd.ie> <2788466ED3E31C418E9ACC5C316615570536E1@mou1wnexmb09.vcorp.ad.vrsn.com> <FA998122A677CF4390C1E291BFCF59890849839E@EXCH.missi.ncsc.mil> <470BB253.3030703@cs.tcd.ie> <FA998122A677CF4390C1E291BFCF598908498416@EXCH.missi.ncsc.mil> <470C1C32.70603@eb2bcom.com> <E75F200AF1718F45B2024A88C3141A1D06437A82F3@EA-EXMSG-C320.europe.corp.micr osoft.com> <p0624082cc331ad9846db@[192.168.1.100]> <470C1FA3.40000@eb2bcom.com> <p06240801c332913ed8ad@[192.168.1.3]> <470EC778.500@eb2bcom.com> <p06240822c33533e1b00d@[192.168.1.3]>
From: "Kemp, David P." <DPKemp@missi.ncsc.mil>
To: Paul Hoffman <paul.hoffman@vpnc.org>
Cc: ietf-pkix@imc.org
X-OriginalArrivalTime: 12 Oct 2007 18:14:35.0950 (UTC) FILETIME=[BEEBACE0:01C80CFB]
X-TM-AS-Product-Ver: : ISVW-6.0.0.1396-3.6.0.1039-15480000
X-TM-AS-Result: : Yes--15.228700-0-31-1
X-TM-AS-Category-Info: : 31:0.000000
X-TM-AS-MatchedID: : 150567-139010-702645-700075-702726-701618-702367-702113-701455-704049-700476-705901-139703-708196-700342-701626-700142-709397-706639-706561-701576-704332-139504-121648-700846-700918-700272-148039-148050-20016-20040
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by balder-227.proper.com id l9CIEg6D073572
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>
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Scan-Signature: 41c17b4b16d1eedaa8395c26e9a251c4
>Paul Hoffman wrote: >It has been established on this list that the upper bounds in X.500 >have been non-normative since the second edition. You said that in an earlier message. Could you point us to a specific section of a specific version of X.500 where that is true? Most of us are not X.500 users. ---------- 1993 --------- http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-X.520-199311-S!!P DF-E&type=items ISO/IEC 9594-6 : 1995 (E) 22 ITU-T Rec. X.520 (1993 E) Superseded by a more recent version Annex A Selected attribute types in ASN.1 (This annex forms an integral part of this Recommendation | International Standard) This annex includes all of the ASN.1 type and value definitions contained in this Directory Specification in the form of the ASN.1 module SelectedAttributeTypes. ---------- 1997 --------- http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-X.520-199708-S!!P DF-E&type=items ISO/IEC 9594-6 : 1998 (E) ITU-T Rec. X.520 (1997 E) 41 Annex C Upper bounds (This annex does not form an integral part of this Recommendation | International Standard) This annex includes all of the suggested upper bound value constraints used in these Directory Specifications, in the form of the ASN.1 module UpperBounds. ---------- 2001 --------- http://www.itu.int/rec/dologin_pub.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC-X.520-200102-I!!P DF-E&type=items ISO/IEC 9594-6:2001 (E) ITU-T X.520 (02/2001 E) 61 Annex C Upper bounds (This annex does not form an integral part of this Recommendation | International Standard) This annex includes all of the suggested upper bound value constraints used in these Directory Specifications, in the form of the ASN.1 module UpperBounds. ---------- 2005 --------- http://www.itu.int/rec/T-REC-X.520-200508-I/dologin.asp?lang=e&id=T-REC- X.520-200508-I!!PDF-E&type=items ISO/IEC 9594-6:2005 (E) 60 ITU-T Rec. X.520 (08/2005) Annex C Upper bounds (This annex does not form an integral part of this Recommendation | International Standard) This annex includes all of the suggested upper bound value constraints used in these Directory Specifications, in the form of the ASN.1 module UpperBounds.
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Russ Housley
- FW: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Stefan Santesson
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Russ Housley
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Hoyt L Kesterson II
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Stephen Farrell
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Kemp, David P.
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Stephen Farrell
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Kemp, David P.
- Re: FW: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF o… Paul Hoffman
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Steven Legg
- Re: FW: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF o… Steven Legg
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Stephen Farrell
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Kemp, David P.
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Paul Hoffman
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Steven Legg
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Paul Hoffman
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Kemp, David P.
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… David Chadwick
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Paul Hoffman
- Re: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… David A. Cooper
- RE: New Liaison Statement, "Liaison to IETF on th… Kemp, David P.