On 19/02/16 00:26, Rich Megginson wrote: > On 02/18/2016 04:15 PM, jfill...@central1.com wrote: >> Hmm. There seems to be differing opinions on the valid format for >> Generalized Time. I've seen docs that allow for 20160215133951.842. > > Can you provide links to those docs? Because that is certainly not the > valid LDAP format.
Maybe it is because there is a Type generalizedTime in the ASN.1 standard as well? http://www.obj-sys.com/asn1tutorial/node14.html That one allows a local time without TZ indication that the LDAP generalizedTime doesn't. J. -- 389 users mailing list 389-users@%(host_name)s http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/389-users@lists.fedoraproject.org
