[Date Prev][Date Next]
[Chronological]
[Thread]
[Top]
Re: Syntax Issues
> I'm also in favor of defining a new
> OID and matching rule (or rules). I'm told of a WG meeting some time
> back (Chicago maybe?) where there was an overwhelming consensus NOT to
> define new syntax OIDS. If this is still the case, a lesser evil might
> be to use Octet String syntax, and just force exact matching (eck).
>
This is part of a larger issue that should be covered by a Shema
BOF if there is one. I have written a PKIX id that has defined
matching rules and syntaxes for certificates and CRLs etc. I dont
think we can dodge this issue in general. Whilst we dont want to
unnecessarily define extra syntaxes for the sake of it, we do want
to allow users to have sensible and easy ways of matching on
complex attributes (such as ACI and certificates)
David
***************************************************
David Chadwick
IS Institute, University of Salford, Salford M5 4WT
Tel +44 161 295 5351 Fax +44 161 745 8169
Mobile +44 790 167 0359
Email D.W.Chadwick@salford.ac.uk
Home Page http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/chadwick.htm
Understanding X.500 http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/X500.htm
X.500/LDAP Seminars http://www.salford.ac.uk/its024/seminars.htm
Entrust key validation string MLJ9-DU5T-HV8J
***************************************************