Re: Second Last Call: draft-ietf-smime-bfibecms (Using the Boneh-Franklin and Boneh-Boyen identity-based Encryption Algorithms with the Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)) to Proposed Standard

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.

Regards,
-sm

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf