Okay, I fat fingered this one. The S/MIME WG actually forwarded
these documents
with a recommendation that they be published as Informational. I
intended to respect
that consensus, but for one reason or another, they ended up in the
Tracker marked
for Standards track.
It is clear that the WG got this one right, and I have changed the
intended status on
both documents to Informational.
Thanks,
Tim Polk
Harald wrote:
SM wrote:
At 05:37 20-10-2008, The IESG wrote:
This is a second last call for consideration of the following
document
from the S/MIME Mail Security WG (smime):
- 'Using the Boneh-Franklin and Boneh-Boyen identity-based
Encryption
Algorithms with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) '
<draft-ietf-smime-bfibecms-10.txt> as a Proposed Standard
Technical issues raised in IETF Last Call and IESG evaluation
have been
resolved. However, there have been substantive changes in the
relevant
IPR disclosures statements since the review process was initiated.
Specifically, IPR disclosure statement #888,
(see https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/888/)
was replaced by PR disclosure statement #950,
(see https://datatracker.ietf.org/ipr/950/)
This Last Call is intended to confirm continued community support in
light of the new IPR disclosure statement. Given the limited
scope of
this Last Call, an abbreviated time period has been selected.
Disclosure statement #888 mentions draft-martin-ibcs-08. That I-D
was published as RFC 5091 in December 2007. Disclosure #950
submitted in May 2008 mentions new licensing terms for RFC 5091.
That disclosure mentions that draft-ietf-smime-bfibecms-10 is on
the Informational Track whereas it is on the Standards Track.
As there seems to be only one implementation and very little
public discussion about the draft, I don't see why it should be on
the Standards Track.
With licensing terms like these, I would want to see a compelling
argument for why the community needs it standardized to put it on
the standards track.
Let it be informational.
Harald
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf