ietf-smime
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: More comments on the certs draft

1997-11-03 17:37:31
At 10:06 AM 10/31/97 -0800, Jim Schaad (Exchange) wrote:
Suggested Changes:

Section 2.3
Receiving agenst [sic] MUST support chaining based on the distinguished
name fields.  Other methods of building certificate chains may be
supported but are not currently recommended.

That looks fine to me.

Also at MailConnect, the S/MIME folks there agreed that S/MIME v2 really
should document what's out there today, not what "should be" out there. As
such, the above makes sense. If we're trying to document just what's in v2
(that is, reality), is that one change sufficient? Do I need to change any
other part of the certs spec? If not, I'll put out another round on
Wednesday for one more last call, and if no one objects, will send it in
for informational RFC over the weekend.


--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • Re: More comments on the certs draft, Paul Hoffman / IMC <=