Re: New SMime Capabilities item

Russ Housley <housley@spyrus.com> Tue, 25 May 1999 21:53 UTC

Received: from mail.proper.com (mail.proper.com [206.86.127.224]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA00668 for <smime-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 25 May 1999 17:53:08 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by mail.proper.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id NAA28822 for ietf-smime-bks; Tue, 25 May 1999 13:59:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from spyrus.com (mail.spyrus.com [207.212.34.30]) by mail.proper.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA28818 for <ietf-smime@imc.org>; Tue, 25 May 1999 13:59:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from rhousley_laptop.spyrus.com ([209.172.119.101]) by spyrus.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/arc) with SMTP id NAA26094; Tue, 25 May 1999 13:57:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <4.1.19990525165128.00921680@mail.spyrus.com>
X-Sender: rhousley@mail.spyrus.com
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1
Date: Tue, 25 May 1999 16:51:54 -0400
To: "Jim Schaad (Exchange)" <jimsch@EXCHANGE.MICROSOFT.com>
From: Russ Housley <housley@spyrus.com>
Subject: Re: New SMime Capabilities item
Cc: "Ietf-Smime (E-mail)" <ietf-smime@imc.org>
In-Reply-To: <2FBF98FC7852CF11912A0000000000010ECB5F4A@DINO>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Sender: owner-ietf-smime@imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-smime/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-smime-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>

Jim:

What OID are you using?

Russ


At 07:59 PM 5/11/99 -0700, Jim Schaad (Exchange) wrote:
>Please add the following to the SMimeCapabilities section of the OIDs
>document on IMC.ORG.
>
>sMIMECapabilitiesVersions ::= {sMIMECapabilities 3}
>SMIMECapabilitiesVersions ::= SEQUENCE OF INTEGER
>--     SMime Capabilities Versions holds the sequence of S/MIME V3
>specifications
>--     understood by the client.   Currently the only two items legal values
>are
>--     v2 (S/MIME version 2) and v3 (S/MIME version 3).   If the item is
>missing from a
>--     capabilities list then V2 only should be assumed.
>
>
>The current justification for this is that S/MIME V2 clients will probably
>not understand the CMS encrypted data objects.  Specifically receipient
>infos other than key transport and may not be able to decrypt the message at
>all if other key managment algorithms are used in the message.
>
>jim
>