[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[TLS] RFC 3456 - OCSP extension question



In regards to the implementation of RFC 3546, in particular the OCSP extension. When the client does not wish to send any list of responders, what is the correct sequence to send (as a zero length vector apparently has a special meaning). It would appear (with my naïve understanding of RFC 2560) that it would be a list of ResponderID’s (from RFC2560). But ResponderID’s are CHOICE’s, and I am not versed in my ASN.1 enough to know if there is a way to write zero of these).

 

So what are the ASN.1 and DER of the correct response for no list. Thanks.

 

      struct {

          CertificateStatusType status_type;

          select (status_type) {

              case ocsp: OCSPStatusRequest;

          } request;

      } CertificateStatusRequest;

 

      enum { ocsp(1), (255) } CertificateStatusType;

 

      struct {

          ResponderID responder_id_list<0..2^16-1>;

          Extensions  request_extensions;

      } OCSPStatusRequest;

 

      opaque ResponderID<1..2^16-1>;

      opaque Extensions<0..2^16-1>;

 

   In the OCSPStatusRequest, the "ResponderIDs" provides a list of OCSP

   responders that the client trusts.  A zero-length "responder_id_list"

   sequence has the special meaning that the responders are implicitly

   known to the server - e.g., by prior arrangement.  "Extensions" is a

   DER encoding of OCSP request extensions.

 

   Both "ResponderID" and "Extensions" are DER-encoded ASN.1 types as

   defined in [OCSP].  "Extensions" is imported from [PKIX].  A zero-

   length "request_extensions" value means that there are no extensions

   (as opposed to a zero-length ASN.1 SEQUENCE, which is not valid for

   the "Extensions" type).

 

 

_______________________________________________
TLS mailing list
TLS@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/tls