Re: Revising attribute type 'mail'?

On Sep 9, 2008, at 1:17 AM, Michael Str=F6der wrote:

> HI!
>
> Given that RFC 5336 and RFC 5337 are out now the question arises =20
> whether
>
> 1. attribute type 'mail' defined in RFC 4524 should be revised to use
> LDAP syntax DirectoryString instead of IA5String with a new OID but =20
> the
> same NAME 'mail'
>
> or
>
> 2. a new attribute type should be defined with a different NAME.

>
>
> Personally I tend to 1.

Attribute type descriptions are suppose to be, other than additional =20
names and extensions, immutable.  Changing 'mail' would surely lead to =20
interop problems.

I think 2 is best.  This also leaves 'mail' available for the =20
alternative address.  And this can all be introduced as Experimental, =20
like RFC 5336/7 are.

-- Kurt