[Date Prev][Date Next] [Chronological] [Thread] [Top]

RE: ;binary and userCertificate (Was: Private email ...)

To: Christopher Oliva <Chris.Oliva@entrust.com>
Subject: RE: ;binary and userCertificate (Was: Private email ...)
From: "Kurt D. Zeilenga" <Kurt@OpenLDAP.org>
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 12:40:47 -0800
Cc: LDAP BIS <ietf-ldapbis@OpenLDAP.org>
In-reply-to: <BFB44293CE13C9419B7AFE7CBC35B9390120D6B5@sottmxs08.entrust .com>

At 11:08 AM 2002-02-21, Christopher Oliva wrote:
>Are you suggesting this is pointless ?

Yes.  Because adding a second transfer mechanism for
these syntaxes solves no interoperability problem between
independently developed implementations of the LDAPv3
technical specification.

In regards to the handling of (userCertificate=*)
versus (userCertificate;binary=*) I would have to
agree that the revision I-D needs to be clarified.
I will offer a minor clarification in a separate
post.

Kurt

Prev by Date: RE: ;binary and userCertificate (Was: Private email ...)
Next by Date: RE: ;binary and userCertificate (Was: Private email ...)
Index(es):
- Chronological
- Thread