Re: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification
Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org> Tue, 18 May 1999 21:10 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 RAA16013 for <smime-archive@odin.ietf.org>; Tue, 18 May 1999 17:10:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by mail.proper.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) id NAA20308 for ietf-smime-bks; Tue, 18 May 1999 13:13:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fax.imc.org (root@[207.94.139.160]) by mail.proper.com (8.8.8/8.8.5) with ESMTP id NAA20304 for <ietf-smime@imc.org>; Tue, 18 May 1999 13:13:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aum (user@ip161.imc.org [207.94.139.161]) by fax.imc.org (8.9.3/8.9.0) with ESMTP id NAA01278; Tue, 18 May 1999 13:12:44 -0700 (PDT)
Message-Id: <4.2.0.44.19990518130602.01edb6f0@mail.imc.org>
X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.0.44 (Beta)
Date: Tue, 18 May 1999 13:13:38 -0700
To: bjueneman@novell.com
From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <phoffman@imc.org>
Subject: Re: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@isi.edu>, ietf-smime@imc.org
In-Reply-To: <006701bea15d$124b2e60$4dd44189@provo.novell.com>
References: <199905171126.HAA17249@ietf.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
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>
At 12:34 PM 5/18/99 -0600, Robert R. Jueneman wrote: >I sincerely regret not having had sufficient time to review the S/MIME v3 >specs in detail during last call and prior to their moving to Proposed >Standard, but I believe that there are several changes that absolutely >must be made before they can progress to final Standard. The issues you bring up here were not changed in the last call drafts. The location of the requirements for algorithms has been the same for over a year. I believe that it is inappropriate for you to object to the RFC Editor at this very late date. The step after they become Proposed Standards is to possibly become Draft Standards, not "final Standard". There will be plenty of time to discuss your issues in the Working Group in the interim. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium
- Protocol Action: Cryptographic Message Syntax to … The IESG
- Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Robert R. Jueneman
- Re: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification EKR
- Re: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Paul Hoffman / IMC
- RE: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Robert R. Jueneman
- Re: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Andrew Farrell
- RE: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Robert R. Jueneman
- RE: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Andrew Ferguson
- Re: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Andrew Farrell
- Re: Issues with S/MIME Message Specification Russ Housley
- Protocol Action: Cryptographic Message Syntax to … The IESG