RE: comment on draft-ietf-ltans-dssc-01.txt

["Tobias Gondrom" <tgondrom@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hello all, 

in the past the fact that we did not have a comprehensive free
ASN.1-compiler for 1997 or 2002 available has been keeping us to at
least provide 1988-ASN.1 as one of the modules with every RFC. 

Thanks to the good and by the IETF well recognized progress on free
ASN.1 compilers for 2002-ASN.1 we can now freely use this more recent
ASN.1 version. So please consider the new version of ASN.1 to be
recommended for your drafts and it no longer to be required to provide a
module in 1988-ASN.1 in parallel. 

Compiler I am referring to is a2c. 

Regards, Tobias



> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ietf-ltans@xxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-ietf-ltans@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Turner, Sean P.
> Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:17 AM
> To: 'Peter Sylvester'; 'Paul Thorpe'
> Cc: ietf-ltans@xxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: comment on draft-ietf-ltans-dssc-01.txt
> 
> 
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Peter Sylvester [mailto:Peter.Sylvester@xxxxxxxxxx]
> >Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 6:30 AM
> >To: Paul Thorpe
> >Cc: Turner, Sean P.; ietf-ltans@xxxxxxx
> >Subject: Re: comment on draft-ietf-ltans-dssc-01.txt
> >
> >
> >
> >>  in 1994 and
> >> replaced with the "open type" which allows ASN.1 compilers to
> >> explicitly link the contents of the "open type" field with
> >the object identifier.
> >>
> >>
> >In other LTANS specifications the following approach is used:
> >
> >One module is specified in 'CURRENT' ASN.1 syntax.
> >An alternative module is done for 'old' compilers with is an
> >almost 88 syntax Which one is normative is still a debate (as
> >in another group).
> >
> >In some specs also an XSD schema is defined. For LTAP at least
> >the XSD is automatically generated from the ASN.1 and produces
> >the same encodings and an XER encoding of the ASN.1
> >
> >Besides that and in response to Sean.
> >
> >Although a module can reuse a name that is defined in another
> >module, I agree that this may be confusing.
> >
> 
> I like the idea of moving to the later ASN.1. The reason we've been
> stopped
> in the past was the lack of an open source compiler. We basically have
one
> now with the a2c compiler.
> 
> Peter - are you saying you don't want to import code, you'd rather
grow
> your
> own? If you do I'd like to see how the current syntax would break out
if I
> specified an elliptic curve and all it's parameters. It would be an
long
> sequence of 'stuff' that you'd have to write up some verbiage about
the
> 1st
> element of the sequence was this, the next this, and so on. That seems
> like
> an unworkable solution to me.
> 
> spt