"Pawling, John" <John(_dot_)Pawling(_at_)GetronicsGov(_dot_)com>
I believe that when an ASN.1 syntax is changed that includes a version field,
then a new version number should be assigned to indicate the new ASN.1 syntax.
It doesn't really change it though, it just adds another option to the CHOICE.
I would hope that any software which works with these things would just skip
the unknown-tagged item (having said that my own code will reject it because I
tend to be overly pedantic in my checking, changing a constant and recompiling
will fix this behaviour). On the whole I don't know whether changing the
version number will have any useful effect, because anything which rejects a
new CHOICE tag is just as likely to reject a new version number (any comments
from implementors? If making either change will break apps equally then I'd
vote to leave the version number alone).
(Just for form's sake, I'll add my standard gripe that if we were using any
kind of non-archaic ASN.1 you could just add '...' to the CHOICE and this
whole issue would go away).
Peter.