Re: [lamps] CMP Update of CertificationRequest

[Russ Housley <[e-mail]>]

Hendrick:

Sorry it took so many messages to get to closure.

> On May 25, 2021, at 12:08 PM, Brockhaus, Hendrik <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
> Russ
> 
> Thanks for clarifying!
> 
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Russ Housley <[e-mail]>
>> Gesendet: Dienstag, 25. Mai 2021 18:03
>> An: Brockhaus, Hendrik (T RDA CST SEA-DE) <[e-mail]>
>> Cc: LAMPS WG <[e-mail]>
>> Betreff: Re: [lamps] CMP Update of CertificationRequest
>> 
>> Hendrik:
>> 
>>> I am still a little confused... Sorry
>>> I am uncertain what you mean by new and old ASN.1 syntax.
>> 
>> I was talking about Appendix A.1 (1988 ASN.1 Module = old ASN.1 syntax) and
>> Appendix A.2 (2002 ASN.1 Module = new ASN.1 syntax).
>> 
>>>> Von: Russ Housley <[e-mail]>
>>>> 
>>>>> On May 25, 2021, at 10:45 AM, Brockhaus, Hendrik
>>>> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> Russ
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Von: Russ Housley <[e-mail]>
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> However, RFC 6402 did choose to locally define CertificationRequest.
>>>>>> I believe this was done because there was a place to IMPORT for the
>>>>>> newer ASN.1 syntax, but not the older.  That way, the two modules
>>>>>> are defining exactly the same things, even though the newer syntax
>>>>>> could
>>>> IMPORT it from RFC 2986.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Maybe we should continue to IMPORT from RFC 2986 in the newer ASN.1
>>>>>> syntax, and define locally in the older ASN.1 syntax, with a
>>>>>> comment that this structure matches the one defined in RFC 2986.
>>>>>> This definition can be lifted from RFC 6402, where Jim Schaad
>>>>>> already did that
>>>> work.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do you think we should change this and directly add the new syntax
>>>>> from RFC
>>>> 6402 to modules in CMP Updates?
>>>> 
>>>> Suggestion:
>>>> 
>>>> New ASN.1 syntax: IMPORT from RFC 2986
>>> 
>>> Do you refer to CMP Updates Appendix A.2 here and should I change the
>>> import of CertificationRequest from RFC 5912 to the one in RFC 2986
>>> ?-)
>> 
>> I believe that they are equivalent, but RFC 5912 is probably easiest for the
>> compiler.
> 
> Should I stick to the Import from RFC 5912 though?

Fine with me.

> 
>> 
>>>> Old ASN.1 syntax: IMPORT from RFC 6402
>>> 
>>> Do you refer to CMP Updates Appendix A.1 here and should I exchange the
>> import of CertificationRequest from RFC 2986 to the definition from RFC 6402
>> Appendix A.1.
>> 
>> Yes, that is my suggestion.
> 
> OK, I will do the change in the next release.

Thanks.

Russ