[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
RE: ;binary and userCertificate (Was: Private email ...)
At 10:20 AM 2002-02-21, Kurt D. Zeilenga wrote:
>Additionally, client
>developer's would have to be warned that some
>servers might use ;binary transfer even though
>the native string was requested. As this is a
>behavior which the existing specification allowed
>(due to an ambiguity in the specification which,
>I hope, will be removed).
I mispoke. The ambiguity I refer to above doesn't
does apply in the certificate case as the existing
specification mandates use of ;binary for certificate
syntaxes. Hence, this warning would not be needed.
My apologies for any confusion caused by my error.
Kurt