S N Henson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Object identifiers and ASN.1 syntax
> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 21:31:40 +0100
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> drh> Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> drh> >
> drh> >
> drh> > I'm try
>BTW, are the ways of asking "standard", "iso" and "8571" about each
>other known? Or is that all part of the game?
you have to go to each registrar (arc owner) in turn.
the means of getting name/numbers can be very formal, or wildly
informal.
/r$
>If I'm understanding correctly, he's saying that "standard" is
>subordinate to "iso", so, effectively, you have to defined something
>like "iso/standard" or "iso.standard" in a flat namespace. That is,
>there could be a _different_ "standard" under, say, "ietf"
Exactly.
_
From: Dr S N Henson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Object identifiers and ASN.1 syntax
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 21:31:40 +0100
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
drh> Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
drh> >
drh> >
drh> > I'm trying to make a simple perl
From: Ben Laurie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ben> BTW, are the ways of asking "standard", "iso" and "8571" about
ben> each other known? Or is that all part of the game?
If I understand correctly, it's "all part of the game"...
ben> Can we write a daemon that does this (I have this vision of one
ben> of
From: Ben Laurie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
ben> BTW, if I'm understanding correctly, what you write is:
ben>
ben> iso.standard OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { 0 }
ben>
ben> or something to that effect...
OK, that starts to make sense. Now to figure out the most efficient
way to parse a OID value..
Rich Salz wrote:
>
> > One can see definitions like this:
> >
> > { iso standard 8571 abstract-syntax (2) }
>
> The names aren't flat. To find out the number for "standard", you
> ask iso. To find out the number of abstract-syntax, you ask the entity
> that maintains "8571" (you might h
Ben Laurie wrote:
> > What I'm trying to figure out is how I will best get together all the
> > information from reading a number of ASN.1 modules. I'm wondering for
> > example how "standard" is defined. Is it something like this?
> >
> > standard OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { iso 0 }
> >
> >
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>
> From: Rich Salz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Object identifiers and ASN.1 syntax
> Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 14:43:05 -0400
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> rsalz> > One can see definitions like this:
>
From: Rich Salz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Object identifiers and ASN.1 syntax
Date: Tue, 03 Oct 2000 14:43:05 -0400
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
rsalz> > One can see definitions like this:
rsalz> >
rsalz> > { iso standard 8571 abstract-syntax
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
>
>
> I'm trying to make a simple perl script that is capable of parsing
> through an ASN.1 module embedded in any document an extracting the
> OIDs from it. When I'm done with that, I'll extend it to be able to
> parse LDAP schemas entries as in RFC2256. T
> One can see definitions like this:
>
> { iso standard 8571 abstract-syntax (2) }
The names aren't flat. To find out the number for "standard", you
ask iso. To find out the number of abstract-syntax, you ask the entity
that maintains "8571" (you might have to ask "standard" who that is
I'm getting a little confused about some parts of OID definitions.
I've tried to understand what "ASN.1 Complete" has to say about it,
but I can't say it really cleared the confusion.
One can see definitions like this:
{ iso standard 8571 abstract-syntax (2) }
which is supposed to mean
13 matches
Mail list logo
