RE: interoperability of ;binary

["Ramsay, Ron" <Ron.Ramsay@ca.com>]

Kurt,

RFC 2559 actually specifies the binary syntax for certificate.

This looks like the horns of a dilemma?

Ron.

-----Original Message-----
From: Kurt D. Zeilenga [mailto:Kurt@OpenLDAP.org]
Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2001 0:52
To: mcs@netscape.com
Cc: ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org
Subject: Re: interoperability of ;binary


At 10:07 AM 4/3/01 -0400, Mark C Smith wrote:
>"Kurt D. Zeilenga" wrote:
>> 
>> In this particular case, I suggest we consider removing the
>> ";binary" transfer option from the specification and all
>> schema elements dependent on it, including: certificate,
>> userCertificate, and strongAuthenticationUser.  Then I suggest
>> reintroduction of these schema elements with alternative
>> string encodings as was done for LDAPv2 (RFC 2559).
>
>A string encoding of a certificate is not useful unless it is fully
>reversible without loss (because PKI applications need access to the
>original DER certificate).

Which is what RFC 2559 provides for LDAPv2, no options required.

-- Kurt