[Date Prev][Date Next]
Re: Cross-purpose SEQUENCE/CHOICE protocol extension fields
Jim Sermersheim wrote:
Along with this view, I'll propose that the current wording in
[Protocol] (below) is sufficient, and defers the mechanisms and usages
of extensibility to X.680. I believe the intent of RFC 2251 and the
intent of [Protocol] is to follow the extensibility rules of X.680 and
not add additional requirements, clarifications, guidelines, etc.
"In order to support future extensions to this protocol, extensibility
is implied where it is allowed per ASN.1"
Works for me.