RE: DISCUSS comments on publickeyfile-09

["Scott Hollenbeck" <sah%428cobrajet.net@localhost>]

That would be fine with me.  Please check for other uses of the "byte" word,
though, too.

-Scott-

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joseph Galbraith [mailto:galb-list%vandyke.com@localhost] 
> Sent: Tuesday, October 04, 2005 3:35 PM
> To: Bill Sommerfeld
> Cc: ietf-ssh%netbsd.org@localhost; Scott Hollenbeck; Sam Hartman
> Subject: Re: DISCUSS comments on publickeyfile-09
> 
> > Section 3, second paragraph, and elsewhere: "MUST NOT be 
> longer than 
> > 72 bytes".  "bytes" is an imprecise term.  Do they really 
> mean "8-bit 
> > ASCII characters", octets, or are 9-bit bytes as 
> implemented on older 
> > hardware architectures also acceptable?
> > 
> > Section 3.4 uses the term "characters" to describe a line length 
> > limitation.
> > Consistency would be good.
> 
> I agree that consistency would be good.
> 
> We do specify that that header-values MUST be encoded in 
> UTF8.  So changing to allow 72 characters could mean a 
> significant growth in the number of bytes allowed on a line 
> (*3 for Japanese text, for example.)
> 
> 8-bit ASCII characters is close, except for those
> UTF-8 header values.
> 
> What if we specified "MUST NOT be longer than 72 8-bit bytes?"
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Joseph
> 
> 
>