[Top] [All Lists]

Re: WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-smime-rfc2633bis-07.txt

2004-02-29 22:16:26

Hare are seven comments. I think number 6 is the most significant one, but none of them are show stoppers.

1.  Should Section 1.4 reference RFC 3369?

2.  Delete section 1.6 before the document is sent to the IESG.

3. Section 2.4 probably should point out that ContentInfo is needed to encapsulate each of the protection content types.

4. What compression algorithm MUST be implemented if CompressedData is supported?

5. Section 2.5.2: s/SMIMECapabilities attribute should/SMIMECapabilities attribute SHOULD/

6. Section 2.6: the first two paragraphs are not clear. S/MIME v3.1 MUST support both issuerAndSerialNumber and subjectKeyIdentifier for sending and receiving.

7. Section s/not currently supported in S/MIME/not currently recommended in S/MIME/


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>