Check for potential upstream problems due to changes in the ASN.1 module

HBrock commented 6 months ago

Michael StJohns wrote:

--> Next - for the changes to the body of the module, are there any upstream modules where such a change could be problematic or limiting? E.g. importing an enum that's been extended? (Do we have a tool for scanning for imports and doing the cross verification?

Carl Wallace proposed: The Referenced By feature of the data tracker could be useful if one wanted to pursue this. For example, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc4210/referencedby/. This is well short of analyzing ASN.1 modules of course.

HBrock commented 5 months ago

I checked all I-Ds and RFCs that normatively or informatively reference RFC 4210. None of them have an ASN.1 module importing from a PKIXCMP-... module. I also checked what parts of RFC 4210 are referred to in the text of the document. RFC 4210 is referred to:

CMP as general example of a protocol managing certificates
root CA cert update
certificate request messages
delivery of centrally generated keys
POP methods other than self-signature
requesting certificates other than X.509v3 public-key certificates
revocation of certificates
transferal of PKIMessages
PKIStatus bits

See the attached PDF for details. References to RFC4210.pdf

HBrock commented 5 months ago

conclusion 26.02.2024 The ASN.1 module is versioned We could not spot any ASN.1 module importing from any of the CMP modules

lamps-wg / cmp-updates

Check for potential upstream problems due to changes in the ASN.1 module #42