[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors

• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
• Date: Fri, 3 Oct 2003 22:58:35 +0100
• In-reply-to: <E1A5XH7-0002yG-00@canteen>
• References: <15725CF6AFE2F34DB8A5B4770B7334EE03F9ED55@h...> <200310032157.44684.miles@m...> <E1A5XH7-0002yG-00@canteen>
• Sender: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
• User-agent: KMail/1.5.1

Tyler Close wrote,
> I am only saying that it must be feasible to maintain an ASN.1
> implementation as part of a legacy codebase.

This is only interesting if expressed in relative terms: it must be at 
least as feasible to maintain an ASN.1 implementation as it would be to 
maintain comparable alternatives. I can't think of any particularly 
good reasons for thinking that's not the case.

> Obviously, OpenSSL and SNMP have had difficulties with that. Are there
> counter-examples of applications that have not had long-lived bugs
> in their ASN.1 code?

Would you like some examples of undetected crimes as well? ;-)

Cheers,


Miles

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: Tyler Close <tyler@w...>

• References:
  • RE: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@i...>
  • Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: Miles Sabin <miles@m...>
  • Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
    • From: Tyler Close <tyler@w...>

• Prev by Date: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Next by Date: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Previous by thread: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Next by thread: Re: Fwd: [e-lang] Protocol implementation errors
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread