"Jerome Freedman Jr." wrote:
ASN.1 has the additional drawback that Marshal T. Rose does not like it and/or understand it. Perhaps it is because Marshal T. Rose did not invent it. Thus, Internet standards are in the main written without it.>> i would like to know about the drawbacks of asn.1 ...
>ASN.1 has no drawbacks
It may be true that ASN.1 has no drawbacks, but it is true that it is perceived at having some. After all this time one would think that the IETF would use it more rather than turning out protocol after protocol with ad hoc descriptions/encodings
The above is written somewhat in jest. We may gauge the willingness and/or skills of the average computer programmer by the Internet standards currently enjoying wide implementation. Why is LDAP popular and not DAP? Could it be that not enough people understood ASN.1, as written or as implemented? Or was it the broadly disseminated view that ASN.1 was too complicated for use? (Thank you Mr. Rose).
The CCITT policy of charging big bucks for small documents might also have some bearing on this situation. Non-ASN.1 documents (RFCs) are freely and broadly available.
Whichever the case, ASN.1 has the doubtful honor of being a non-ubiquitous universal standard -- it is known about and available everywhere, but understood and used in a minority of cases.
Thus, a political answer to a technical question. So be it.
Mark
