[plasma] Delegation scenario

"Fitch, Scott C" <scott.c.fitch@lmco.com> Tue, 25 October 2011 17:56 UTC

Return-Path: <scott.c.fitch@lmco.com>
X-Original-To: plasma@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: plasma@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C94B921F8BD5 for <plasma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:56:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.598
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.598 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id nTN6YS6ZhU8i for <plasma@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:56:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailfo01.lmco.com (mailfo01.lmco.com []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E0EA021F8BC5 for <plasma@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 10:56:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mailgw1a.lmco.com (ppalertrelay.lmco.com []) by mailfo01.lmco.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p9PHuuO1007555 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for <plasma@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 18:56:57 +0100
Received: from emss07g01.ems.lmco.com (relay5.ems.lmco.com [])by mailgw1a.lmco.com (LM-6) with ESMTP id p9PHusFm023086for <plasma@ietf.org>; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:56:55 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from CONVERSION2-DAEMON.lmco.com by lmco.com (PMDF V6.4 #31805) id <0LTM00201V6TC5@lmco.com> for plasma@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:56:53 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from HDXHTPN7.us.lmco.com ([]) by lmco.com (PMDF V6.4 #31805) with ESMTP id <0LTM00B5QV6OBX@lmco.com> for plasma@ietf.org; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:56:48 +0000 (GMT)
Received: from HDXDSP11.us.lmco.com ([fe80::c04a:c222:3486:3e3]) by HDXHTPN7.us.lmco.com ([fe80::f1:ff4b:90a4:695%14]) with mapi id 14.01.0289.001; Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:56:48 -0600
Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:56:47 +0000
From: "Fitch, Scott C" <scott.c.fitch@lmco.com>
X-Originating-IP: []
To: "plasma@ietf.org" <plasma@ietf.org>
Message-id: <DFE85D7EFA640D4886E9A9141AEBCD200A097B8A@HDXDSP11.us.lmco.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_mdMHyOeee6wR0nEm2nYnfw)"
Content-language: en-US
Thread-Topic: Delegation scenario
Thread-Index: AcyTPvJuZ6lTqdglQi+54J/v8g5UNQ==
Accept-Language: en-US
X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.4.6813, 1.0.211, 0.0.0000 definitions=2011-10-25_06:2011-10-25, 2011-10-25, 1970-01-01 signatures=0
Subject: [plasma] Delegation scenario
X-BeenThere: plasma@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The PoLicy Augmented S/Mime \(plasma\) bof discussion list." <plasma.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/plasma>, <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/plasma>
List-Post: <mailto:plasma@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma>, <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:56:59 -0000

Plasma also opens up the opportunity to support delegation in a much more sustainable and elegant manner than current PKI-based S/MIME. I'd like to see that called out as a scenario in Section 3. Others have similar thoughts?