1.
|
Clear description of the referenced document:
|
|
|
2.
|
Status of approval:
|
|
October 2003 as Proposed Standard
|
3.
|
Justification for the specific reference:
|
|
LDAP requires some attribute types to be encoded in a way not specified by the ITU-T X.690 Series of Recommendations | ISO/IEC 8825-all parts but is specified IETF RFC 3641.
|
4.
|
Current information, if any, about IPR issues:
|
|
Information on IPR issues regarding RFCs is available at: https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/search/.
|
5.
|
Other useful information describing the "Quality" of the document:
|
|
Approved in October 2003 as Proposed Standard.
|
6.
|
The degree of stability or maturity of the document:
|
|
Updated by RFC 4792. No errata are available.
|
7.
|
Relationship with other existing or emerging documents:
|
|
Not known.
|
8.
|
Any explicit references within that referenced document should also be listed:
|
|
Normative References/
[1] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997./
[2] Kille, S., "MIXER (Mime Internet X.400 Enhanced Relay): Mapping between X.400 and RFC 822/MIME", RFC 2156, January 1998./
[3] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF", RFC 2234, November 1997./
[4] Wahl, M., Coulbeck, A., Howes, T. and S. Kille, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Attribute Syntax Definitions", RFC 2252, December 1997./
[5] Wahl, M., Kille S. and T. Howes. "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): UTF-8 String Representation of Distinguished Names", RFC 2253, December 1997./
[6] Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646", RFC 2279, January 1998./
[7] ITU-T Recommendation X.520 (1993) | ISO/IEC 9594-6:1994, Information Technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory: Selected attribute types/
[8] ITU-T Recommendation X.680 (07/02) | ISO/IEC 8824-1:2002 Information technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Specification of basic notation/
[9] ITU-T Recommendation X.681 (07/02) | ISO/IEC 8824-2:2002 Information technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Information object specification/
[10] ITU-T Recommendation X.682 (07/02) | ISO/IEC 8824-3:2002 Information technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Constraint specification/
[11] ITU-T Recommendation X.683 (07/02) | ISO/IEC 8824-4:2002 Information technology - Abstract Syntax Notation One (ASN.1): Parameterization of ASN.1 specifications/
[12] ITU-T Recommendation X.690 (07/02) | ISO/IEC 8825-1:2002 Information technology - ASN.1 encoding rules: Specification of Basic Encoding Rules (BER), Canonical Encoding Rules (CER) and Distinguished Encoding Rules (DER)/
/
Informative References/
[13] Hovey, R. and S. Bradner, "The Organizations Involved in the IETF Standards Process", BCP 11, RFC 2028, October 1996./
[14] Hodges, J. and R. Morgan, "Lightweight Directory Access Protocol (v3): Technical Specification", RFC 3377, September 2002./
[15] Legg, S., "Common Elements of Generic String Encoding Rules (GSER) Encodings", RFC 3642, October 2003.
|
9.
|
Qualification of
ISOC/IETF:
|
|
9.1-9.6 Decisions of ITU Council to admit ISOC to participate in the work of the Sector (June 1995 and June 1996).
9.7 The Internet Engineering Steering Group (IESG) is responsible for ongoing maintenance of the RFCs when the need arises. Comments on RFCs and corresponding changes are accommodated through the existing standardization process.
9.8 Each revision of a given RFC has a different RFC number, so no confusion is possible. All RFCs always remain available on-line. An index of RFCs and their status may be found in the IETF archives at http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc.html.
|
10.
|
Other (for any supplementary information):
|
|
None.
|
|