RE: Basic Cert-2-Directory mapping question

["Jim Schaad" <jimsch5@xxxxxxxx>]

This does not match my memory of what was going on at the time.  My memory said that the Issuer DN was made required to simplify the chaining issues for building names.  I do not remember this as being pushed from the S/MIME working group although several of us from the S/MIME working group probably gave comments on this issue. 

 

jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Stephen Kent [mailto:kent@xxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2001 1:56 PM
To: Slone, Skip
Cc: ietf-pkix@xxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Basic Cert-2-Directory mapping question

Skip,

I would just like to add that, in addition to X.521 and some LDAP specs, the ability to recognize civil naming attributes in the issuer and subject fields of an X.509v3 cert is mandated in RFC 2459 (ref section 4.1.2.4) and in son-of-2459.

Ironically, the requirement for support for Issuer names (DNs) vs. allowing an Issuer alname in lieu of a DN, arose because the S/MIME WG was relying on the presence of an Issuer DN in their design, and I believe the motivation for it (Russ can confirm or correct this notion) was to facilitate directory lookup for certs in S/MIME!

<snip>

Steve