Subject: Re: [certid] version -11

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 10:28:29 -0700

On 11/29/10 8:20 PM, Matt McCutchen wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-11-29 at 16:31 -0700, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>    Finally, although theoretically some consider the order of AVAs
>>    within an RDN to have meaning, in practice that rule is not observed.
>>    An AVA of type CN to be valid at any position within the subject
>>    field.
> 
> The last sentence is missing a verb.
> 
> Also, I don't see how AVAs within an RDN could ever have a meaningful
> order.  The RDN is a "SET OF" AVAs, i.e., unordered.  The encoding order
> is not significant; in fact, it is fixed by DER.

Right, my bad. It should be:

   Finally, although theoretically some consider the order of RDNs
   within a DN to have meaning, in practice that rule is not observed.
   An AVA of type CN is considered to be valid at any position within
   the subject field DN.