-----Original Message-----
From: Brian Korver [mailto:briank@terisa.com]
Sent: Tuesday, 30 June 1998 9:12
To: BJUENEMAN@novell.com
Cc: briank@terisa.com; ietf-pkix@imc.org; Harald.Alvestrand@maxware.no;
housley@spyrus.com
Subject: Re: PKIX-1 - use of UTF8
>snip
Bob,
I'm certainly not telling anyone "simply speak English", or suggesting
that anyone else do that. Maybe I haven't been clear.
Let me restate my point: I don't know that implementations that support
BMPString are any more common than implementations that support UTF8String.
(by "support", I mean that they do not merely treat DNs (et al.) as
opaque data.)
BMPString is a recent addition to DirectoryString. I'd like to know
if there are any non-SET implementations that actually support
BMPString (again, don't confuse "support BMPString" with "support for
UNICODE"). I believe there aren't many (any?) non-SET implementations that
actually support BMPString, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
If support for BMPString is widespread, then backwards compatibility is
an issue. If support for BMPString is not widespread, then backwards
compatibility may not be an issue.
cm> Agreed, Perhaps the question should be, if UTF8 was implemented today, is there any existing application that would break ?. If not then UTF8, seems a better choice for implementors due to its evolutionary approach.
brian
briank@terisa.com