Paul,
I concur with the proposed changes, but I would suggest that the two
statements be made consistent with the terminology currently used in the
-MSG draft. See below.
Francois Rousseau
AEPOS Technologies
At 09:28 AM 23/03/99 -0800, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
Greetings again. As was discussed in Minneapolis, I propose two small but
significant changes to the -msg draft. There was pretty strong agreement in
the room at the time, but I'm open to feedback from the list.
I propose that the following statement should be added to Section 2.2:
Note that S/MIME v2 clients are only capable of verifying digital
signatures using the rsaEncryption algorithm.
I suggest it should read:
Note that S/MIME version 2 receiving agents are only capable of verifying
digital signatures using the rsaEncryption algorithm.
I also propose that the following statement should be added to Sec 2.3:
Note that S/MIME v2 clients are only capable of decrypting content
encryption keys using the rsaEncryption algorithm.
I suggest it should read:
Note that S/MIME version 2 receiving agents are only capable of decrypting
content encryption keys using the rsaEncryption algorithm.
Both sentences reflect reality, not politics. However, I think it's
important to add them because a naive developer who picks up the S/MIME v3
spec might miss the fact that their implementation won't interoperate with
v2 implementations unless they add (if they can) rsaEncryption.
--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium