-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On May 4, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Sam Hartman wrote:
Do people in the working group support making the change Chris
proposes? It is unlikely to be required by the IESG and is unlikely
to delay the document either way. The question is whether people
believe that it would make the document better.
I object most strongly.
As an implementer, I do lots of work to make OpenPGP/MIME work
correctly. The problem is that this is not easy, particularly in the
case where you want to have a very complex message and encryption and
signatures. It's fine for an implementer to strive for that because
customers want it. It's wholly another thing for the standard to say it.
Additionally, these "harmful" headers have been around for the last
fifteen years. It's not like we're suddenly creating these things.
Ian has also said as adequately as I have that OpenPGP's technology
is used for many other things than email. I don't need to add more.
Jon
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP Universal 2.6.1
Charset: US-ASCII
wj8DBQFGO82hsTedWZOD3gYRAlb3AJ0aF1rzfn5er/zhLHUyqLVGlJ8y5wCeN58P
kmDOoao217/kkyers2UtNRg=
=nMIm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----