Subject: Re: LTANS summary
From: Peter Sylvester <[email-masked]>
To: Carl Wallace <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2006 10:25:52 +0100
List-Id: <ietf-ltans.imc.org>

Carl Wallace wrote:
> Seems like you are suggesting we have one appendix that imports from
> PKIX/CMS and another that uses later syntax.  That seems like a good way
> forward to me.  Tobias should have all of the materials necessary to produce
> the two appendices.
>   
yes, basically. It seems that the intention of the comments from Russ are
to help implementers as much as possible. To me this means that

1 - there should be a syntax that allows to use new asn.1 syntactic features
     so that compiler features may be used as much as possible, e.g. to 
avoid
     some hand coded additions for constraints or to type reolution.

2 - making a complementary syntax to help those who use tools from the
    last millenaire :-)

It is not the current syntax that is normative because it is richer.
>   
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Peter Sylvester [mailto:[email-masked]] 
>> Sent: Thursday, November 23, 2006 5:11 AM
>> To: Carl Wallace
>> Cc: [email-masked]; [email-masked]
>> Subject: Re: LTANS summary
>>
>> The LTANS minutes contain the following:
>>
>> "ERS completed working group last call.  A new version will 
>> be posted that addresses some offlist comments that were 
>> submitted during last call. That version will be cross-posted 
>> to the S/MIME working group to elicit wider review prior to 
>> submission to IESG, which will ideally occur before the end 
>> of the year.  One comment related to the source for the 
>> ContentInfo and AlgorithmIdentifier IMPORT statements in the 
>> ASN.1 module.  Russ indicated that free compiler support was 
>> still lacking and recommended that we maintain the CMS and 
>> PKIX IMPORTS.  There was no objection, so this change will 
>> not be made in version -09. "
>>
>> First:  making a decision in this way doesn't seem 
>> appropriate. people present at the meeting are not 
>> necessarily representative.
>>
>> I object strongly: It is absolutely necessary to provide an 
>> ASN1 module that uses current ASN.1 in order to allow modern 
>> compilers to work. It is unacceptable to force compiler 
>> writers to maintain a difficult and obsololete syntax form, 
>> in fact a feature that is assumed not to be implementable 
>> correctly at all.
>>
>> It is possible though to provide a module in obsolete syntax 
>> that make some existing tools happy.
>>
>> The modules from which imports are done are rather 
>> complicated because the also use rather new features of ASN1 
>> like parameterized types.  
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     

-- 
To verify the signature, see http://edelpki.edelweb.fr/ 
Cela vous permet de charger le certificat de l'autorité; 
die Liste mit zurückgerufenen Zertifikaten finden Sie da auch.