RE: LDAP Certificate transfer syntax

[Sharon Boeyen <sharon.boeyen@entrust.com>]

>From the PKIX perspective, I firmly believe that backward compatibility 
with the PKIX LDAP specs is a very important issue. I believe that what 
David is proposing satisfies that important criteria and support the 
proposal. 

Sharon 

-----Original Message----- 
From: Mark Wahl [mailto:Mark.Wahl@sun.com] 
Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2002 2:51 PM 
To: David Chadwick 
Cc: Kurt D. Zeilenga; Mark C Smith; LDAP BIS; PKIX; mark.wahl@sun.com 
Subject: Re: LDAP Certificate transfer syntax 


David Chadwick wrote: 
> 
> 
> Now to the backwards compatibility issues. In the table below the only 
> problem will come with a new LDAPv3 client that does not use ;binary 
> with an existing v3 server that demands it. But we already have an 
> inconsistency in these current LDAPv3 servers in that they accept LDAPv2 
> queries without ;binary but not LDAPv3 queries without ;binary. 

I do not think LDAPv2-LDAPv3 behavior is sufficient justification to cause 
incompatibility between two LDAPv3 implementations. 

Maybe an "LDAPv4" should have a different way for clients to send  
certificate, but LDAPv2 compatibility should not be a concern that causes 
this significant a change inside of the LDAPv3 specs.  That is out of scope 
for LDAPBIS. 

Mark Wahl 
Sun Microsystems Inc.