Comments on draft-ietf-smime-ess-07.txt
Clause 2.9
Using the SIZE constraints (1..MAX), where the implementor can chose MAX will
course interoperability problems. Nor only due to possible loss of attributes,
but to the fact that an implementation design with a lower MAX than received,
should reject the message as a protocol violation.
We shall assign a fixed number to MAX.
4 is a reasonable value, since I by this has to propose a figure.
Appendix B (used in 3.2 )
The reference to [MTSABS]/X.411 ought to be changed. In those days it was not
ITU, it was CCITT (International Telegraph and Telephone Consultative
Committee). Secondly all references to the 1988 publication are deprecated due
to the amount of corrigenda issued to that publication. Even if there are no
corrigendum relevant to the security label ASN.1, it's better to refer to the
1992 publication (still CCITT) which has the same technical content but has the
corrigenda incorporated.