-----Original Message-----
From: Darren Harter <dharter(_at_)cesg(_dot_)gov(_dot_)uk>
To: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org <ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org>;
em(_at_)who(_dot_)net <em(_at_)who(_dot_)net>
Date: Tuesday, November 10, 1998 2:36 AM
Subject: Re: Algorithm Dependancy Issues
Enzo,
IHO, the aim of the S/MIME WG is to ensure interoperability of S/MIME. I
view S/MIME as a profile (the MSG spec) of the CMS/ESS and other specs. So
to be S/MIME compliant you must meet the mandatory elements of the MSG spec
and this implies compliancy with certain aspects of the CMS spec, but not
all of it.
I believe that vendors should be able to remain CMS compliant without being
S/MIME compliant or dependant of S/MIME's algorithms suite.
IMHO, protocol and procedural compliancy should be treated differently from
algorithm compliancy. I would like to see CMS be algorithm independant.
For this reason, IMO I believe your question should have been:
Wouldn't that endanger interoperability between S/MIME-compliant agents
sitting on the two sides of the fence, and exchanging mail through a
gateway?
And the answer would be no, as the S/MIME spec ensures interoperability.
But there are gateways that bridge between Internet (RFC822+MIME) and
non-Internet mail transports. Why should those two worlds risk
non-interoperability, even when the agents on both sides comply with CMS?
The S/MIME working group might choose not to address this issue, but then
someone else (a CMS working group?) should.
Enzo