Subject: RE: SPNEGO-bis comments/questions

From: "Liqiang\(Larry\) Zhu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 13:06:18 -0800

Tom Yu wrote:
>  Constraints, including size constraints, go after a type.  (There's
an exception for SEQUENCE OF and SET OF but we won't 
> worry about that.) The named bit list is part of the BIT STRING type.
Try moving the size constraint so that it follows 
> the named bit list.

Thanks,

lzhu> Also is there any issue w.r.t. allocating the relative-OIDs for 
lzhu> the SPNEGO ASN.1 module here?

lzhu> iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)           
lzhu>        security(5) mechanism(5) snego (2) modules(4) spec2(2)

Tom, can you verify the selected OID is available

-- larry

-----Original Message-----
From: Tom Yu [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 8:54 AM
To: Liqiang(Larry) Zhu
Cc: Sam Hartman; Simon Spero; [email-masked]; [email-masked]
Subject: Re: SPNEGO-bis comments/questions

>>>>> "lzhu" == Liqiang\(Larry\) Zhu <Liqiang> writes:

lzhu> I could not compile the ASN.1 module with the SIZE constrains 
lzhu> using Microsoft ASN.1 compiler.

lzhu>     ContextFlags ::= BIT STRING (SIZE (32)) {             
lzhu>         delegFlag       (0),             
lzhu>         mutualFlag      (1),             
lzhu>         replayFlag      (2),             
lzhu>         sequenceFlag    (3),             
lzhu>         anonFlag        (4),             
lzhu>         confFlag        (5),             
lzhu>         integFlag       (6)         
lzhu>     }

Constraints, including size constraints, go after a type.  (There's an
exception for SEQUENCE OF and SET OF but we won't worry about that.) The
named bit list is part of the BIT STRING type.  Try moving the size
constraint so that it follows the named bit list.

lzhu> Also is there any issue w.r.t. allocating the relative-OIDs for 
lzhu> the SPNEGO ASN.1 module here?

lzhu> iso(1) identified-organization(3) dod(6) internet(1)           
lzhu>        security(5) mechanism(5) snego (2) modules(4) spec2(2)

I'm not sure what you're asking.

---Tom

_______________________________________________
Kitten mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/kitten

---

From: "Liqiang\(Larry\) Zhu" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2005 16:34:06 -0800

Martin wrote:
> So I think we should be fine extending the S(P)NEGO OID for additional
usage within the SPNEGO spec.  

This is good. Thanks,

-- Larry

-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Rex [mailto:[email-masked]] 
Sent: Tuesday, January 04, 2005 3:16 PM
To: Liqiang(Larry) Zhu
Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked]; [email-masked];
[email-masked]

> lzhu>        security(5) mechanism(5) snego (2) modules(4) spec2(2)

What kind of issue do you expect?

The OID (arc) 1.3.6.1.5.5.2 was assigned by IANA for use with S(P)NEGO.
Normally, by assigning an OID to someone/something, you give up control
for the entire arc beginning with that OID along with it (I would say),
so whoever gets assigned the OID becomes the registrar for OID
extensions below.

So I think we should be fine extending the S(P)NEGO OID for additional
usage within the SPNEGO spec.  

-Martin