Re: OpenPGP/MIME changes

[Jon Callas <[e-mail]>]

On 19 Jul 2006, at 4:02 PM, Brian G. Peterson wrote:

>
>> On 2006-07-19 13:44:13 -0700, Jon Callas wrote:
>>> * OpenPGP/MIME work. We have issues with OpenPGP/MIME and
>>> interoperability with it. ... At the other end of the scale,
>>> tidying up OpenPGP/MIME means coming up with a profile of an
>>> existing standard.
>
> On Wednesday 19 July 2006 16:08, Thomas Roessler wrote:
>> So, the current OpenPGP/MIME spec is already relatively strict
>> and actually takes away some of the degrees of freedom that the
>> original PGP/MIME left open.  Would you care to elaborate a bit
>> more about what points you'd like to clean up?
>
> Look back a ways in the archives to the various tabled discussions on
> OpenPGP/MIME and the other variants (inline/partitioned) for email.  I
> remember significant issues being discussed around offline signature
> verification on binary attachments, signatures on signatures (chain of
> evidence), and interoperability issues on the layout of MIME parts.
>
> All of the issues that I mentioned above from memory are issues  
> that are
> directly important to me that I would be participating heavily in  
> working
> on fixing.  This working group correctly tabled a lively discussion on
> some of these issues over a year ago to focus on getting 2440bis
> finalized.

Thanks.

That's basically it.

I wrote down all the things I could remember that we'd said we'd talk  
about later. It's quite possible or even reasonable that for any (or  
all) of these that the WG would decide we're not interested, or that  
an individual submission is just fine.

	Jon