In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Thu, 6 May 2004 08:24:57 -0400, "Erik Tkal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
etssl> Can anyone answer this? How do I tell if this is a known etssl> problem with OpenSSL or if the RFC is incorrect, or if this is etssl> just a accepted deviation? I can't really say, as that's not my forte in OpenSSL, so what I say is just a guess. There are several places in OpenSSL (some ASN.1 stuff among others, IIRC) where the standards aren't entirely followed to the letter (you could say that the standards have been expanded a little bit, to be kind), so as not to break with some other software (I think Microsoft is often mentioned at this point...) that deviates from standards a little bit. My guess is that this possibility to generate an empty list of ceritificate requests may be that kind of deviation. I would love it if those in the team that really know the SSL parts could give an accurate response... ----- Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte \ Tunnlandsvägen 52 \ [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] \ S-168 36 BROMMA \ T: +46-708-26 53 44 \ SWEDEN \ Procurator Odiosus Ex Infernis -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Member of the OpenSSL development team: http://www.openssl.org/ Unsolicited commercial email is subject to an archival fee of $400. See <http://www.stacken.kth.se/~levitte/mail/> for more info. ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org Development Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
