Steve Crocker writes:
o No debate has taken place on the pem-dev mailing list.
Most of the details in the current specification have actually been
discussed in the open in one form or another. Even so, nothing
precludes further discussion.
You are claiming that MIME/PEM issues have been addressed in the open.
This is exactly what I didn't want to hear. They have not been
addressed openly, and hearing you say they have only underscores my
sense that the authors are out of touch with the rest of the pem-dev
voices. Let me clarify this with two examples, one from the past and
one that is currently active.
The decision to add the PGP identifier happened offline from pem-dev.
Shortly after, Steve Dusse posted a message asking why MIME/PEM needs
to support an identifier from another standard which has incompatible
encoding protocols. He suggested that the better approach is for them
to define their own MIME body part. This suggestion enjoyed *zero*
response from the authors. And now recently, the decision was made
offline to remove the PGP identifier, not due to discussion on
pem-dev, but rather some other mysterious process. The same outcome
of Steve's original suggestion has happened but not by addressing
concerns openly. This is extremely disquieting.
For a current example, Kazuhiko Yamamoto writes:
On page 19 and 20, an example of Originator-ID is given as follows;
---
Originator-ID:PK,MHkwCgYEVQgBAQICAwADawAwaAJhAMAHQ45ywA357G4fqQ61aoC1fO6B=
ekJmG4475mJkwGIUxvDkwuxe/EFdPkXDGBxzdGrW1iuh5K8kl8KRGJ9wh1HU4TrghGdhn0Lw8g=
G67Dmb5cBhY9DGwq0CDnrpKZV3cQIDAQAB,EN,2,galvin(_at_)tis(_dot_)com
---
This shows us that <keysel> is '2'.
BNF of <keysel> is defined on page 28 and 32 as follows;
<keysel> ::= <encbin>
<encbin> ::= 1*<encbingrp>
<encbingrp> ::= 4*4<encbinchar>
<encbinchar> ::= ALPHA / DIGIT / "+" / "/" / "="
It seems me that <keysel> should consist of at least 4 characters with
this spec. But <keysel> example up above is only one character.
Please tell me whether my understanding is wrong or the I-D is
inconsistent.
I haven't seen a response to his question.
I have my own questions I'd like to post, but I feel they will be
ignored as Steve Dusse's was before and Kazuhiko Yamamoto's is now.
If responses are being given, they should happen on pem-dev.
I'd like the name of someone personally accountable for addressing
questions, as we enjoyed with Steve Kent in the original PEM effort.
It appears Steve Crocker is no longer directly involved in the TIS
effort (what is CyberCash anyway?), so it has to be someone else.
- Jeff