Re: Finalizing OpenPGP/MIME?

[Florian Weimer <[e-mail]>]

Thomas Roessler <[e-mail]> writes:

> To everyone: Please re-read draft-ietf-openpgp-mime-02.txt and
> draft-ietf-openpgp-multsig-01.txt.

Suggestions for typographical corrections are prefixed with [T],
changes in wording with [W], changes to the specification with [S].

Generall:

[T] Use symbolic bibliographic references instead of bare numbers.
    (Makes reading easier.)

Section 1:

[T] Replace 'RFC 1847' with 'RFC 1847'. (Consistency)

Section 2:

[T] Replace 'multipart ASCII armor OpenPGP format' with
    'multi-part ASCII armor OpenPGP format' (cf. OpenPGP)

[S] Make MIME multipart mechanism in favor of OpenPGP multi-part messages
    REQUIRED.  (It is hard to imagine how OpenPGP multi-part messages can
    interoperate with other implementations.)

Section 5:

[S] Include wildcard value for "micalg" parameter.  (Makes generating
    OpenPGP/MIME messages much easier in some situations, but breaks
    one-pass processing, of course.  Today, the majority of
    OpenPGP/MIME installations/implementations doesn't deal correctly
    with this parameter anyway.)

Still Section 5, enumeration (2):

[T] Spell 'recommended' in capital letters.

[W] Replace 'mail transfer agents' with 'mail delivery agents' (or
    both).  In general, only MDAs touch messages in this way, not MTAs.

Still Section 5, example message:

[W] The signature on the example message doesn't seem to be valid (?).
    BITNET is dead.

Section 6.1:

[W] The signature on the example message is invalid.

Section 7:

[S] Neither OpenPGP nor OpenPGP/MIME specify the transfer format of
    public key blocks, so this section doesn't make much sense.

Section 10:

[T] Replace 'OP' with 'OpenPGP'.

-- 
Florian Weimer 	                  [e-mail]
University of Stuttgart           http://cert.uni-stuttgart.de/
RUS-CERT                          [phone]/fax [phone]