> > Yeah, I've come across this also. It seems that a CHOICE within a CHOICE is > encoded with an explicit tag even if it is in an implicit tag module. I > guess this is to avoid the ambiguity that you mention. This is so in ASN1. > > Moreover in the RFC 3161 I found the following definition > tsa [0] GeneralName OPTIONAL, > in a module that seems to me > with IMPLICIT tagging. Therefore I have this doubt: when I encode this value > if I use IMPLICIT tagging I'm modifying the tagging of the encoding of the > previous > CHOICE whit the (possible) conseguence of having an ambiguous encoding. > Is this correct or am I missing some important points ? CHOICEs are always EXPLICIT. Be careful with some compilers or almost-compilers, when using a syntax like tsa [0] GeneralName OPTIONAL If the compiler does not 'know' that GeneralName is a CHOICE. You might need to rewrite tsa [0] EXPLICIT GeneralName OPTIONAL ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED] Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
