All,
I disagree with Bengt's assignment of 4 to 'MAX' in ESS. This value is much
too low. The following are the ASN.1 syntaxes in ESS that include 'MAX'.
ContentHints ::= SEQUENCE {
contentDescription UTF8String SIZE (1..MAX) OPTIONAL,
contentType ContentType }
ESSPrivacyMark ::= CHOICE {
pString PrintableString SIZE (1..ub-privacy-mark-length),
utf8String UTF8String SIZE (1..MAX)
}
MLReceiptPolicy ::= CHOICE {
none [0] NULL,
insteadOf [1] SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF GeneralNames,
inAdditionTo [2] SEQUENCE SIZE (1..MAX) OF GeneralNames }
I believe that ESS should remain as is so that it can provide sufficient
flexibility to support a variety of user organization requirements.
================================
John Pawling, jsp(_at_)jgvandyke(_dot_)com
J.G. Van Dyke & Associates, Inc.
www.jgvandyke.com
================================
At 08:59 AM 8/31/98 +0100, Bengt(_dot_)Ackzell(_at_)postbox(_dot_)mil(_dot_)se
wrote:
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.