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

Re: draft-ietf-ldapbis-filter-03.txt

Hallvard B Furuseth wrote: 
Why was section 6 "String Search Filter Definition" changed to
say that "all octets greater than 0x7f" must be escaped?

Shouldn't that at least be "MUST" esacpe them when generating filters,
but SHOULD (or MAY) recognize them unescaped, for backwards
compatibility?

That change was the result of working group last call comments made by Steven Legg (but I am the one who wrote the text). But I think I unintentionally made a protocol change. Is there a good reason to require that all octects > 0x7f be escaped? I do not remember all of the details surrounding those older conversations.


> Also, the change should be noted in Appendix A.

Agreed. Also, if we leave the escaping requirement in, I agree with you we should add text that suggests that recognizing octets > 0x7f when they are not escaped is good practice.


Also,


7.  Examples
      (1.3.6.1.4.1.1466.0;binary=\04\02\48\69)


;binary has been removed from [Protocol]. 

Good catch.

-Mark