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

Re: ldapbis WG Last Call on ldapbis-syntaxes, ldapbis-strprep

Kurt D. Zeilenga writes:
>>> Personally, I don't think "foo<REPLACEMENT CHARACTER>bar"
>>> should be an allowed value of CN.
>>
>> No opinion.  I don't even know what <REPLACEMENT CHARACTER> is.
> 
> You might want to consider all the other cases where the preparation
> fails and hence the rule evaluation is Undefined.  There are many.

True.  Well, I wouldn't want Private Use code points to be prohibited
from existing in the directory, at least.  They exist to be used, and
someone who uses them will want to put them in LDAP.

-- 
Hallvard