RE: Matching rule review comment on 3280bis

[Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

You are right, but I think it adds very few words to include the
"(including insignificant space handling)" part.

Russ

At 09:27 AM 9/13/2007, Kemp, David P. wrote:

Russ,
 
I optimized it out because it seemed redundant, but don’t have any
objection to mentioning it explicitly, for example:
 
   Conforming implementations MUST use the LDAP StringPrep profile
   (including insignificant space handling), as specified in
   [RFC 4518], as the basis for comparison ...
 
For PrintableString the first five steps of StringPrep (Transcode,
Map, Normalize, Prohibit, Check bidi) can be bypassed completely,
but the sixth step (Insignificant Space Handling) is required for
all DirectoryString types.  Although RFC 4518 canonicalization
is a bit more verbose than strictly necessary for non-wildcard
equality matching (exactly 1 leading and trailing space and
exactly 2 internal spaces, vs. the traditional no leading/trailing
and 1 internal space), there isn’t a downside to using it is there?
 
Dave
 

---

From: Russ Housley [ mailto:housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, September 12, 2007 2:08 PM
To: Kemp, David P.; pkix
Subject: RE: Matching rule review comment on 3280bis
 
Dave your text is an improvement, but don't you think that the trimming of leading and trailing white space deserves mention?

Russ