Blake,
In the process of looking at ESS, I notice that there is an smime-type
defined there. So it appears that MSG will not contain the definitive
list no matter what is done. I would like it to contain the definitive
list of all of CMS however.
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 Jim
Schaad
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2003 10:18 PM
To: 'Blake Ramsdell'; jimsch(_at_)exmsft(_dot_)com
Cc: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: proposed addition to application/pkcs7-mime
smime parameter
Blake,
I see a few ways to proceed, in my personal preference order:
1. Commit to the current direction of using the MSG draft to
define how to use MIME with everything in CMS, as well as
providing a constrained subset of CMS for the purpose of
interpersonal messaging.
2. Don't put anything in MSG at all that doesn't have to do
with interpersonal messaging, but leave what's there (the
definition of the application/pkcs7-mime and the currently
used smime-types). Any additional smime-type values are
defined outside of the MSG draft.
3. Separate everything that has to do with the MIME wrapping
of CMS objects into its own draft (CMS/MIME), and don't
discuss anything about interpersonal messaging at all. The
MSG draft simply contains references to the CMS/MIME draft,
and is a profile of it. This is somewhat like the separation
of CMS and CMSALG, I think.
I will admit that my preference order is influenced by my
role as the editor, and the desire to see MSG progress sooner
rather than later.
I have one argument for varient 3 that I just thought of that
might be overwelming at a later date, but certiantly not
currently. If SIP is dependent on the CMS/SMIME/Messaging
draft, and we update that draft for a messaging only item,
then SIP gets reset on its progression path as well. I don't
think this is an immeadiate issue, but something to consider
in the future.
If we go with the version 1 draft, then we should perhaps
look at reorginaizing the draft along the lines of looking
like a profile of a previously defined item rather than
having items intermixed. I have not looked at the documents
to see how intermixed messaging is with the document and will
do so later this weekend.
Blake
Jim