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

Re: Implementing a matching rule for binary (ie:

Stef wrote:
> Kurt Zeilenga wrote:
>> On Feb 20, 2009, at 6:11 PM, Stef wrote:
>>> I'm working on using openldap to store certificate requests (ie: PKCS#10
>>> and SPKAC).
>>> I thought I'd use the binary syntax '' for
>>> my custom attribute.
>> Why?  This syntax should be avoided.  It was dropped with revised LDAP
>> specifications (RFC 4510) for good reason.  Any uses of it will suffer
>> significant interoperability problems.
> I guess that means that uses of the userSMIMECertificate and userPKCS12
> attributes in openldap will encounter these problems. These are both
> defined with the syntax of ''.

Do you have any use-case where you need equality matching on one of those?

BTW: I don't know any client which writes userSMIMECertificate except
Netscape Communicator 4.5+. (AFAIK it's supposed to be opaque-signed
S/MIME message with zero-length body signed by the private key holder.)

So IMO it's ok to leave this schema definition as is for backward

Ciao, Michael.