paul at nohats.ca
Wed Apr 30 00:57:26 EEST 2014
On Tue, 29 Apr 2014, D. Hugh Redelmeier wrote:
> | From: D. Hugh Redelmeier <hugh at mimosa.com>
> | OID 89 is terminal but has no name
> | I don't know what OID names are used for, but this is the only
> | terminal that has no name. Odd.
> | Should we see what look to see if StrongSwan has improved the table?
> Yes, we should. OID 89's anomaly indicated a bug, fixed by
> strongswan over 3 years ago.
Note that having or knowing all OIDs in the known universe isn't really
useful. The only ones we use are the parts of the certificate ID for
How many OIDs are currently described in this repository?
There are more than 644,000 OID descriptions stored in our repository
(see exact number). The repository is well alive and updated as often as
necessary; statistics are available about the number of OIDs added to
the repository (or updated) over the past 12 months. A (non-exhaustive)
list of standards (and other documents that define OIDs) which have been
captured in our repository is available.
Limiting to IETF PKIX one would help, but I don't know of any new OIDs
we need to support. If people have requirements, they can always come
and suggest we add support for it or give us patches.
More information about the Swan-dev