On Tue, 25 Jul 2023 05:29:41 GMT, Xue-Lei Andrew Fan <xue...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> Max is on vacation and may not see your question for a while... >> IIRC, the inconsistency (NULL vs omission) goes way back. As time goes on, >> this may no longer be an issue as spec is clarified and vendors update their >> implementation. > > I checked back the specification back to RFC 2437, released on October 1998, > which requires to encode NULL parameters as well. As the update to keep the > consistency is not trivial, I may just remove it and see if it could be a > real problem in practice. Yes, let's try it and see. ------------- PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/14839#discussion_r1276793982
