Re: your mail

Alan.Young@zh014.ubs.ubs.ch Fri, 08 January 1993 10:47 UTC

X400-Received: by mta haig.cs.ucl.ac.uk in /PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/; Relayed; Fri, 8 Jan 1993 09:29:47 +0000
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 09:29:47 +0000
X400-Originator: osi-ds-request@cs.ucl.ac.uk
X400-Recipients: non-disclosure:;
X400-MTS-Identifier: [/PRMD=uk.ac/ADMD=gold 400/C=gb/; haig.cs.uc.377:08.00.93.09.29.47]
Priority: Non-Urgent
DL-Expansion-History: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk ; Fri, 8 Jan 1993 09:29:47 +0000;
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Alan.Young@zh014.ubs.ubs.ch
Message-ID: <"20173 Fri Jan 8 10:26:21 1993"@zh014.ubs.ubs.ch>
To: " (John H. Dale)" <jdale@tango.cos.com>
Cc: osi-ds@cs.ucl.ac.uk
In-Reply-To: <9301071921.AA15018@tango.cos.com>
Subject: Re: your mail
Phone: +41 1 236 7866

>I agree with what you have said, except that I don't think
>versions in the bind will be all you need to make distributed
>operations work. For example, consider signed, distributed operations.

Agreed, see below.

---- Forwarded message ----
To: Nick Emery 07-Jan-1993 0913 <emery@emery.enet.dec.com>
Phone: +41 1 236 7866
In-reply-to: Your message of Thu, 07 Jan 93 10:13:20 +0100.
             <9301070913.AA09011@enet-gw.pa.dec.com> 
Date: Fri, 08 Jan 93 10:12:24 +0100
From: zhyon@zh014.ubs.ubs.ch

>I don't agree that using a new version is in accordance with other
>standards. There are not many other standards that do relaying. In
>fact, it is not possible (at the moment) to negotiate a version between
>the DUA and the DSA that generates the results. Version negotiation
>only happens on a point to point basis.

Agreed.  I did not mean to be appearing to support the 'version
number' argument.  My main point was that relaxed decoding
rules are required by other standards and thus the capability
should be available from decoders in general.

Alan.

Re: your mail Alan.Young