John:
They have been resolving WG Last Call comments. Nothing nasty is going on.
I expect the document to be posted this week.
Russ
At 03:57 PM 7/9/2001 -0400, Pawling, John wrote:
Michel,
I agree with everything that Jim stated except that I have not seen the
updated x400wrap document to which he referred. The x400wrap authors should
submit the updated document so that implementers can develop to the same
spec.
===========================================
John Pawling, John(_dot_)Pawling(_at_)GetronicsGov(_dot_)com
Getronics Government Solutions, LLC
===========================================
-----Original Message-----
From: Jim Schaad [mailto:jimsch5(_at_)home(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, July 06, 2001 6:39 PM
To: 'Musy Michel-P28089'; 'Ietf-Smime (E-mail)'
Subject: RE: SMIME-TYPE question
Michel,
I understand where you went wrong -- you didn't. I have seen a later draft
of this document and this has been changed. Since EncapsulatedContentInfo
and ContentInfo have the exact same content (i.e. an OID and ANY), having
both is actually redunant. This means that the ContentInfo can be omitted
and just the EncapsulatedContentInfo used to convay the same information.
jim