Re: [Jmap] Erik Kline's No Objection on draft-ietf-jmap-smime-09: (with COMMENT)

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

Hi Erik,

Thank you for your comments.

On 18/10/2021 07:35, Erik Kline via Datatracker wrote:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Just some random questions that came to mind...
>
> [S4.2, question]
>
> * Is there any benefit to/reason to consider some boolean like
>    "hasVerifiedAtDeliverySmime"?
Yes, it might be useful to know whether a message (or a group of 
messages) was valid (S/MIME signed/verified) at delivery time.
> [S5, question]
>
> * In section 4.1, the values of smimeStatus are defined as
>
>     ... Possible string values of the property are
>     listed below.  Servers MAY return other values not defined below, as
>     defined in extensions to this document.
>
>    If the intention is that documents that update this document are the
>    the way to create new possible values, should this imply the establishment
>    of a registry of these values?
>
>    But perhaps this level of process is not desired.

I suppose the document can create a registry. But I can only think of a 
couple of additions that can be added when S/MIME encryption is also 
used. I would probably leave this to a future document.

Best Regards,

Alexey