The WG LC review period has long passed. This ID will be forwarded to the AD
for review.
spt
_____
From: owner-ietf-smime(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org
[mailto:owner-ietf-smime(_at_)mail(_dot_)imc(_dot_)org]
On Behalf Of Turner, Sean P.
Sent: Monday, June 18, 2007 5:49 AM
To: ietf-smime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-smime-cms-auth-enveloped-04.txt
This message initiates an SMIME Working Group Last Call on the document:
Title : Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) Authenticated-Enveloped-Data
Content Type
Author(s) : R. Housley
Filename : draft-ietf-smime-cms-auth-enveloped-04.txt
Pages : 11
Date : 2007-4-26
This document describes an additional content type for the Cryptographic
Message Syntax (CMS). The authenticated-enveloped-data content type is
intended for use with authenticated encryption modes. All of the various key
management techniques that are supported in the CMS enveloped-data content
type are also supported by the CMS authenticated-enveloped-data content
type.
A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-smime-cms-auth-enveloped-04.
txt>
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-smime-cms-auth-enveloped-04.t
xt
The purpose of this WG Last Call is to ensure that the Working Group has
achieved consensus that the document is suitable for publication as a
Standard Track RFC.
Please review the document for both technical and editorial problems.
Technical issues should be discussed on this list. Editorial issues may be
sent to the document editor.
****NOTE****
There has been much discussion on the ordering of the authAttrs field and
the number of authAttrs field(s). Pay special attention to this issue during
the review.
****NOTE****
The Last Call period will end on Monday, July 2, 2007.
Upon completion of the last call, the WG chairs will take action based upon
the consensus of the WG. Possible actions include:
1) recommending to the IETF Security Area Directors
that the document, after possible editorial or
other minor changes, be considered by the IESG
for publication as a Standards Track RFC
(which generally involves an IETF-wide Last Call); or
2) requiring that outstanding issues be adequately
addressed prior to further action (including,
possibly, another WG Last Call).
Remember that it is our responsibility as Working Group members to ensure
the quality of our documents and of the Internet Standards process. So,
please read and comment!
spt