ietf-smime
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Interop Requirement for Signed Data formats

2004-03-26 12:33:56

I think that we have plenty of implementations that already handle both. Please correct me if this is not the case.

If my assertion holds, then MUST for both formats seems like the best way forward.

Russ

At 11:02 AM 3/26/2004 -0800, Jim Schaad wrote:

Chris,

That still does not give interop as a receiving agent may only handle
application/pkcs7-mime.

Making it MUST to receive both handles that problem.

jim

-----Original Message-----
From: Bonatti, Chris [mailto:BonattiC(_at_)ieca(_dot_)com]
Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 9:17 AM
To: jimsch(_at_)exmsft(_dot_)com
Cc: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: RE: Interop Requirement for Signed Data formats

Agree.  It should read:

There are two formats for signed messages defined for S/MIME:
application/pkcs7-mime with SignedData, and multipart/signed.
Sending agents MUST support the multipart/signed form, and SHOULD support
the application/pkcs7-mime form. Receiving agents SHOULD be able to handle
both.

Chris


-----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, March 26, 2004 02:16
To: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Interop Requirement for Signed Data formats



In my last review of the document I found the following text in section 3.4

There are two formats for signed messages defined for S/MIME:
application/pkcs7-mime with SignedData, and multipart/signed. In general,
the multipart/signed form is preferred for sending, and receiving agents
SHOULD be able to handle both.

The problem here is that there is no interop in the signed message format as
specified by the above statement. I.E. Person one could implement
application/pkcs7-mime only and person two could implemement
multipart/signed only -- no interop.

The best change for interop purposes is to change the SHOULD to a MUST.


Comments?

Jim