1996-02-24 - IA5 String…
Header Data
From: Alex Deacon <alex@verisign.com>
To: Raph Levien <raph@c2.org>
Message Hash: 48f6f5452a6fb0a5ee6aad4fe7203d134a6e801a1be44857207a05538bd750f9
Message ID: <312E44ED.5EAF@verisign.com>
Reply To: <199602230055.QAA15846@infinity.c2.org>
UTC Datetime: 1996-02-24 19:26:28 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 03:26:28 +0800
Raw message
From: Alex Deacon <alex@verisign.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 1996 03:26:28 +0800
To: Raph Levien <raph@c2.org>
Subject: IA5 String...
In-Reply-To: <199602230055.QAA15846@infinity.c2.org>
Message-ID: <312E44ED.5EAF@verisign.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
> There was a lot of energy around S/MIME. People are implementing
> it. Internally, it's pretty kludgely, but it does provide pretty good
> cryptographic services. (as an aside, my favorite kludge anecdote is
> the fact that X.509 certificates use an IA5 character set rather than
> ASCII, so that the @ in email addresses has to be represented as (a)
> instead).
Wow, is this true? I dont think so. The CCITT document I have (CCITT
T.50) mentions that an @ sign (Commercial at) is a member of the IRV.
>From what I understand IA5 basically means US ASCII.
Alex
Thread
Return to February 1996
- Return to “Alex Deacon <alex@verisign.com>”
- Return to “Bill Wohler <wohler@uluru.worldtalk.com>”
Return to “Raph Levien <raph@c2.org>”
- 1996-02-24 (Sat, 24 Feb 1996 16:18:31 +0800) - No Subject - Raph Levien <raph@c2.org>
- 1996-02-24 (Sun, 25 Feb 1996 03:24:42 +0800) - Re: IA5 String… - Bill Wohler <wohler@uluru.worldtalk.com>
- 1996-02-24 (Sun, 25 Feb 1996 03:26:28 +0800) - IA5 String… - Alex Deacon <alex@verisign.com>