Jeff and Marcus:
The draft-ietf-smime-idea-07.txt was submitted. It should be posted today
or tomorrow.
The error in the draft has been fixed. So, the working group is finished
with the document. It is ready for the IESG and subsequent publication as
an Informational RFC.
Russ
From: "Teiwes, Stephan (iT_SEC)" <stephan(_dot_)teiwes(_at_)it-sec(_dot_)com>
To: "'Russ Housley'" <housley(_at_)spyrus(_dot_)com>
Cc: "'jimsch(_at_)nwlink(_dot_)com'" <jimsch(_at_)nwlink(_dot_)com>,
"'blaker(_at_)deming(_dot_)com'"
<blaker(_at_)deming(_dot_)com>
Subject: RE: URGENT: draft-ietf-smime-idea-06
Date: Wed, 30 Aug 2000 16:56:33 +0200
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Russ, Blake and Jim,
I'd like to apologize for not having immediately considered your important
comment on our draft. However, I didn't receive the your e-mails from IMC.
The reason is not clear to me as I am on the mailing list. However, a
collegue of mine also reported to me that he didn't receive e-mails from the
SMIME WG for some weeks. Thus, I've to check what's going wrong.
Your comment is correct! We've changed the encoding sequences and send a
modified draft to the ietf.
Thanks a lot for your help and your understanding.
*Stephan
-----Original Message-----
From: Russ Housley [mailto:housley(_at_)spyrus(_dot_)com]
Sent: Montag, 28. August 2000 19:05
To: stephan(_dot_)teiwes(_at_)it-sec(_dot_)com;
peter(_dot_)hartmann(_at_)it-sec(_dot_)com;
diego(_dot_)kuenzi(_at_)it-sec(_dot_)com
Subject: URGENT: draft-ietf-smime-idea-06
Obviously, I missed one of the changes in my summary. How quickly can you
generate one that repairs this problem?
Russ
At 08:30 AM 08/25/2000 -0700, you wrote:
>Note that this problem is still present in the -06 draft (that has
completed
>WG last call), and it will potentially lead to interoperability problems.
>Fortunately, I don't care since it isn't in the base S/MIME spec and I
never
>plan to use it.
>
>Blake
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Blake Ramsdell
>Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2000 2:35 PM
>To: 'jimsch(_at_)nwlink(_dot_)com'; ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
>Subject: RE: draft-ietf-smime-idea-03
>
>
>And just to be clear, this absolutely must be fixed (either the text must
be
>corrected to say that the parameters are encoded as ASN.1 NULL or the
>examples must be corrected as I have pointed out). The MUSTS in the
current
>draft are contradictory.
>
>Blake
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jim Schaad [mailto:jimsch(_at_)nwlink(_dot_)com]
>Sent: Monday, June 12, 2000 1:22 AM
>To: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
>Subject: RE: draft-ietf-smime-idea-03
>
>
>This has not been taken care of in the -04 draft.
>
>jim
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-ietf-smime(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org
>[mailto:owner-ietf-smime(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org]On Behalf Of Blake
Ramsdell
>Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 4:04 PM
>To: 'jimsch(_at_)nwlink(_dot_)com'; ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
>Subject: RE: draft-ietf-smime-idea-03
>
>
>Agree. I think this should be 300D at the beginning, and trim the last two
>bytes off of both examples.
>
>Blake
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Jim Schaad [mailto:jimsch(_at_)nwlink(_dot_)com]
>Sent: Friday, April 14, 2000 12:35 AM
>To: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
>Subject: draft-ietf-smime-idea-03
>
>
>The S/MIME Capability sequences appear to be wrong. In section 4 paragraph
>2,
>the text states that the parameters field must be absent, however the
>encoding
>sequence given has the parameters encoded as NULL. The same is true in
>paragraph
>3 of the same section.
>
>jim
>http://www.nwlink.com