[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Binary vs. ASCII for certificates
Bancroft Scott writes:
[in discussing ASCII encodings]
> How do you propose handling internationalization? Is spki targeted
> mainly at the English speaking world?
Well, one might note that the major entities one might want to mention
in a certificate are things like domain names, which are already
constrained to be in ASCII. If it appears that other things have to be
encoded, I'd say that going for UNICODE certificates would be a big
mistake -- it would eliminate all the benefits of ASCII but force all
the worst problems associated with such a format. If we had to encode
such things routinely, either an ASCII encoding of those entities
like the one used in mail headers ought to be stolen, or a binary
format selected.
> My own preference is the use of ASN.1 in a judicious manner such as is
> done in HTTP-NG,
Are the HTTP working group people actually thinking of using ASN.1?
Perry
References: