W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org > September 2007

More DName test suggestions

From: Sean Mullan <Sean.Mullan@Sun.COM>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 13:04:08 -0400
To: XMLSec <public-xmlsec-maintwg@w3.org>
Message-id: <46E96D88.9020507@sun.com>

Juan Carlos did a great job on this section, but there are too many 
DName test cases for me to complete by tomorrow [1]. So, in the 
interests of time, I think we should concentrate on what I think are the 
more important cases, based on the current XML DSig draft:

- differences between RFC 2253 and RFC 4514 that may introduce 
interoperability problems. These are the tests in section 3.5.1. I have 
added two additional tests as mentioned in my previous email.

- for section 3.5.2, I think we should concentrate on cases in which a 
generator has applied the OPTIONAL encoding steps as defined in section 
4.4.4.1 [2]. I think this is important, as it tests whether a verifier 
can still parse the DNs and that they are still RFC 4514 compliant.

So I propose we remove the following test cases (for now, anyway):

xmldsig/dnString-1-positive
xmldsig/dnString-2-positive
xmldsig/dnString-3-positive
xmldsig/dnString-5-positive
xmldsig/dnString-7-positive (very similar to 6)
xmldsig/dnString-9-positive (very similar to 8)

Please let me know if you have any comments by end of today.

--Sean

[1] 
http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/interop/xmlsig-interop-doc/testcases.html#TestCases-DistinguishedName

[2] http://www.w3.org/2007/xmlsec/Drafts/xmldsig-core/#dname-encrules
Received on Thursday, 13 September 2007 17:04:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:22:02 GMT