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

Re: encodings: do we need binary at all?



-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

> Meanwhile, put me in the camp that hates ASN.1.  Worse than worthless,
> from a strict implementation and debugging perspective.
> 
I don't think that TLV is necessarily a bad thing, but certainly ASN.1
  is an elephantine mess.  Consider that one of its EARLY (ca 1988)
  formal specifications is over 400 pages.  Consider the BNF specification
  for ANSI C is 6 pages!  The "standard reference text" for ANSI C is,
  including the BNF and index, 272 pages.

The problem I have with ASN.1 is that it seems to have been developed
  by a committee in which anyone who had ever described or encoded any
  type of needlessy-ornate structure got to have support in the language for
  it.

But I digress. The IETF community needs a good way of describing
  protocol elements, and that isn't necessarily as bit-layouts
  enclosed in collections of '+' '-' and '|'.  This isn't necessarily
  the working group where such a thing should be invented :-) :-)

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: 2.6.2

iQBVAwUBMTECVKp9EtiCAjydAQE6xAH+IG42KxjgYSo4Hv6psMrHYdZZ5aBrggNt
f1DmC9Sqtm8MzaXCBaozVmTVKX7VnvCjBdWQvVyqyXrHqTPg8XHd4w==
=8IYg
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Leech                   Mail: Dept 4C16, MS 238, CAR
Systems Security Architect     Phone   : (ESN) 395-4901  (613) 763-9145
Systems Security Services      Fax     : (ESN) 393-7679  (613) 763-7679
Nortel Technologies            mleech@bnr.ca
-----------------Expressed opinions are my own, not my employers------

References: