RFC-5914

[jsatchell]

I am working on a small private project to learn some rust, and see how some of my day job code could be re-implemented. One of things that is used for a proprietary customer (their copyright) is Trust Anchors, as defined by RFC 5914 . This is a small ASN1 module, mostly re-using types defined elsewhere in ras-pkix.

I have had a naive attempt at rolling my own definition for RFC-5914, copying the style of the definitions in rasn-pkix.

Would their be any interest or value in this for a wider audience? If so, I can ask my boss about releasing what I have done so far. There are less than 50 lines.

I am pretty new to this, so please forgive me if this is not suitable question for this forum!

[XAMPPRocky]

Thank you for your question! I'd accept a PR adding it to rasn-pkix, it seems too small to be its own crate. Contributions and questions are always appreciated and encouraged 🙂

[jsatchell]

There is a PR; not really much to it. I have seen at least one embedded case where the TA is not a full certificate, but rather a very cut down option allowed by this RFC. The RFC also defines an OID for a new content type, which I added. Bet that one is not met very often in the wild!

[XAMPPRocky]

I have seen at least one embedded case where the TA is not a full certificate, but rather a very cut down option allowed by this RFC.

Is that something that your PR can parse? I don't want to support non-standard stuff, but if it's allowed by the RFC then maybe it should be somewhat compatible.

[jsatchell]

It should handle that case. That would correspond to the TaInfo choice, and many fields are optional, so very simple cases are supported.

…

On Mon, 24 Apr 2023, 16:24 XAMPPRocky, ***@***.***> wrote: I have seen at least one embedded case where the TA is not a full certificate, but rather a very cut down option allowed by this RFC. Is that something that your PR can parse? I don't want to support non-standard stuff, but if it's allowed by the RFC then maybe it should be somewhat compatible. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#115 (reply in thread)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AC4N6MG7XNXPULN6HQQTAVLXC2LMRANCNFSM6AAAAAAXITTA34> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>