Eliot Lear <[email protected]> wrote:
    > I have no objection.  My only caution is that otherName is poorly
    > supported in the open source tool sets, but that is something we could
    > conceivably work on.

I disagree!
otherName is adequately supported (if poorly documented) in openssl.cnf for our 
purposes.
Creating otherName SAN extensions from library interface is fully supported.

The openssl x509 -text output program does not know how to format arbitrary
otherName text, so it just says <unsupported>.

Here is an proprietary otherName that I created awhile ago, implemented in ruby:

      # the OID: 1.3.6.1.4.1.46930.1 is a Private Enterprise Number OID:
      #    iso.org.dod.internet.private.enterprise . SANDELMAN=46930 . 1
      @idevid.add_extension(extension_factory.create_extension(
                              "subjectAltName",
                              sprintf("otherName:1.3.6.1.4.1.46930.1;UTF8:%s",
                                      self.sanitized_eui64),
                              false))

The hardest part was figuring out the ";UTF8:" part, as I had to read the C
code underneath to learn how that worked.
(false, is I think, whether it is critical)

--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]>, Sandelman Software Works
 -= IPv6 IoT consulting =-



Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

_______________________________________________
Anima mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima

Reply via email to