RE: Comment on ESS and Privacy Marks

I also agree with the change to IMPLICIT.   This was a classic case of
my not fully understanding ASN.  I thank Bancroft for the discussion on
implicit vs excplicit as I now have a much clearer understanding of
these issues.

jim


> -----Original Message-----
> From: jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com [mailto:jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 1998 5:32 AM
> To: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
> Subject: RE: Comment on ESS and Privacy Marks
>
>
> All,
>
> I agree with Bancroft Scott that ESSPrivacyMark should be 
> re-defined as follows:
>
> > ESSPrivacyMark ::= CHOICE {
> >    pString      PrintableString (SIZE (1..ub-privacy-mark-length)),
> >    utf8String   [0] IMPLICIT UTF8String (SIZE 
> (1..ub-privacy-mark-length))
> > }
>
> Note Bancroft's point as follows:
>
> > Another
> > benefit is that if someone is using a tool that does not support
> > UTF8String they can simply change it to "[0] OCTET STRING" 
> and get the
> > same encoding. 
> ================================
> John Pawling   
> jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com                             
> J.G. Van Dyke & Associates, Inc.           
> ================================