Re: Proposed changes to the -msg draft

[Francois Rousseau <[e-mail]>]

Paul,

I concur with the proposed changes, but I would suggest that the two
statements be made consistent with the terminology currently used in the
-MSG draft. See below.

Francois Rousseau
AEPOS Technologies

At 09:28 AM 23/03/99 -0800, Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote:
>Greetings again. As was discussed in Minneapolis, I propose two small but 
>significant changes to the -msg draft. There was pretty strong agreement in 
>the room at the time, but I'm open to feedback from the list.
>
>I propose that the following statement should be added to Section 2.2:
>
>Note that S/MIME v2 clients are only capable of verifying digital 
>signatures using the rsaEncryption algorithm.
>

I suggest it should read:

Note that S/MIME version 2 receiving agents are only capable of verifying
digital signatures using the rsaEncryption algorithm.

>I also propose that the following statement should be added to Sec 2.3:
>
>Note that S/MIME v2 clients are only capable of decrypting content 
>encryption keys using the rsaEncryption algorithm.
>

I suggest it should read:

Note that S/MIME version 2 receiving agents are only capable of decrypting
content encryption keys using the rsaEncryption algorithm.

>Both sentences reflect reality, not politics. However, I think it's 
>important to add them because a naive developer who picks up the S/MIME v3 
>spec might miss the fact that their implementation won't interoperate with 
>v2 implementations unless they add (if they can) rsaEncryption.
>
>--Paul Hoffman, Director
>--Internet Mail Consortium
>
>