From: Frank Balluffi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
frankb> My experience has been that you need to consult each standard
frankb> separately. RFC 2459 is good in that it includes object
frankb> identifiers from a bunch of standards, including the PKCS
frankb> standards, and the X.5 standards (e.g., X.509 and X.520).
Unfortunately, I don't have access to the X.509 and X.520.
The long names of the attributes are not a problem, they are normally
what is defined in the corresponding ASN.1 module. The problem is the
short names. A couple of collegues and I spent some time looking
through the PKCS documents that seemed relevant (PKCS#9), RFC2459,
RFC2253, RFC2252 and the 6th draft of X.509 4th edition and a few
other documents that I don't remember, and came up with almost 0. And
still, short names have been used for a while, since they do appear in
X.400 addresses and in DNs a little here and there.
--
Richard Levitte \ Spannv�gen 38, II \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Chairman@Stacken \ S-168 35 BROMMA \ T: +46-8-26 52 47
Redakteur@Stacken \ SWEDEN \ or +46-709-50 36 10
Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/
Software Engineer, Celo Communications: http://www.celocom.com/
Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400.
See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info.
______________________________________________________________________
OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org
Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
