I would have a great deal of heartburn with this approach. I am aware of no
MIIME-PEM implementations other than the one offered by TIS. Currently,
MIME-PEM does not run on the platforms we're interested in and does not support
the encryption algorithms we need (unless this has changed recently). I don't
think dropping rfc1421 is a good idea at all.
Phil Smiley
-------------
Original Text
From PWillia @ SMTP (Peter Williams)
{pem-dev-request(_at_)magellan(_dot_)TIS(_dot_)COM}, on
12/16/94 10:45 AM:
To: pem-dev @ SMTP (pem-dev) {pem-dev(_at_)tis(_dot_)com}
Assiduously avoiding gnats, elephants, and standards definitions, lets
concentrate on the devisive topic. I feel a little responsible for most
of this thread, as I passively and deliberately flamed it into
existance. For one, I learned a lot about MIME multipart structures,
the concept, and its relevance to other areas which are evolving
strongly in tandem.
Let us put a violent motion to the floor, and guage the discontent.We
might as well get this out of the way.
Does anyone feel that dropping the original RFC 1421-concept totally would
affect their vital interests, financial future, projects, deployed
implementations, egos, etc?
Would this step quickly bring about a dramatic increase in the number
of PEMed messages flying around by leaving only MIME-PEM concept in
the field of issue, regardless of its ambiguous operational qualities,
which might be worked on?