Potential Pitfalls of the Use of ASN.1 in IETF Protocols
draft-yu-asn1-pitfalls-04
| Document | Type |
Expired Internet-Draft
(individual)
Expired & archived
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Taylor Yu | ||
| Last updated | 2000-03-10 | ||
| RFC stream | (None) | ||
| Intended RFC status | (None) | ||
| Formats | |||
| Stream | Stream state | (No stream defined) | |
| Consensus boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| RFC Editor Note | (None) | ||
| IESG | IESG state | Expired | |
| Telechat date | (None) | ||
| Responsible AD | (None) | ||
| Send notices to | (None) |
This Internet-Draft is no longer active. A copy of the expired Internet-Draft is available in these formats:
Abstract
A number of IETF protocols make use of Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1), which is a very complex language for describing abstract types and values, in addition to several sets of encoding rules for those types and values. Some of these uses of ASN.1, particularly the Kerberos protocol [RFC1510] pose implementation problems. This document analyzes some of the likely problems associated with the use of ASN.1 in IETF protocols, and some possible reasons for these problems.
Authors
(Note: The e-mail addresses provided for the authors of this Internet-Draft may no longer be valid.)