Subject: RE: RFC2253 e-mail address

From: "Ramsay, Ron" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2001 10:13:07 +1100

Michael,

Since we're talking of the string representation of distinguished names,
PKIX should follow the LDAP (proposed) standard.

Ron.

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Ströder [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, 15 November 2001 21:23
To: Ramsay, Ron
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: RFC2253 e-mail address

"Ramsay, Ron" wrote:
> 
> So, why isn't it a real solution. You code the object identifier and wrap
> the value:
> 
> 1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.115.121.1.41=#0411726f6e2e726a6d7361794063612e636f6d

Because it's unclear which BER-encoding to use for the string type?
E.g. if CN contains NON-ASCII chars and the attribute value is
encoded as T61String. Which string type to use for the BER encoding?
The answer is clear for LDAP (UTF-8-encoded Unicode wrapped in OCTET
STRING). But for PKIX?

Ciao, Michael.