ietf-smime
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: S/MIME version number

2001-04-13 06:37:26
John:

I understand that X.509-2000 includes updated syntax for the attribute Certificate (AC). However, this structure already includes a version number. The earlier syntax has v1, and the later syntax has v2. Since this stricture is "self versioning," why do we need to update the version number in the parent structure?

Would people prefer to import structures from the PKIX documents (as opposed to the ITU-T and ANSI X9 documents)? At the time RFC 2630 was done, PKIX did not have a profile of ACs. Note that the PKIX AC profile requires the use of v2 AC syntax.

Russ

At 10:51 AM 4/9/2001 -0400, Pawling, John wrote:
However, there is another factor to discuss related to this issue.  The
Attribute Certificate (AC) ASN.1 syntaxes defined in the 1997 and 2000 X.509
Recommendations are incompatible.  I believe that it is planned for the
"son-of-RFC 2630" to import the AC syntax from the 2000 X.509 Recommendation
rather than from the 1997 X.509 Recommendation as with RFC 2630.  This will
result in a change to the AC syntax included in the CertificateChoices
syntax used in the CMS SignedData and EnvelopedData syntaxes.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>