IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [lamps] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-06: (with COMMENT)

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Thu, 21 June 2018 03:12 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: spasm@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 13A3413119B; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:12:01 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.879
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.879 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, T_SPF_HELO_PERMERROR=0.01, T_SPF_PERMERROR=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id gGEu3fgfXofO; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:11:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from nostrum.com (raven-v6.nostrum.com [IPv6:2001:470:d:1130::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EAA5D131190; Wed, 20 Jun 2018 20:11:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.1.95] (cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id w5L3BOW2086040 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO); Wed, 20 Jun 2018 22:11:26 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
X-Authentication-Warning: raven.nostrum.com: Host cpe-66-25-7-22.tx.res.rr.com [66.25.7.22] claimed to be [10.0.1.95]
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
Message-Id: <27DB767D-B845-4AF2-9E86-AD24074A5E40@nostrum.com>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Apple-Mail=_48838413-8F66-4A7C-860A-1F2786F12ABC"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg="pgp-sha512"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.4 \(3445.8.2\))
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2018 22:11:23 -0500
In-Reply-To: <000c01d408aa$fe21af70$fa650e50$@augustcellars.com>
Cc: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>, SPASM <spasm@ietf.org>, IESG <iesg@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis@ietf.org
To: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>
References: <152938120582.3146.786592198431535201.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <000701d40843$c29d0b50$47d721f0$@augustcellars.com> <56E0819D-6A8C-45A0-A90A-3585AE2DA580@nostrum.com> <7C1AAC8D-BF70-4A8F-A486-77731EB8BC74@vigilsec.com> <000c01d408aa$fe21af70$fa650e50$@augustcellars.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.8.2)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/spasm/rHN2D8j06752moyNi5aSRQEiFJw>
Subject: Re: [lamps] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-06: (with COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: spasm@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26
Precedence: list
List-Id: "This is a venue for discussion of doing Some Pkix And SMime \(spasm\) work." <spasm.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/spasm/>
List-Post: <mailto:spasm@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/spasm>, <mailto:spasm-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2018 03:12:01 -0000

Right—it’s really just a nit. The heading already has the information; but IMO it should be repeated in the body.

 Context: I (and I am given to believe I am not alone in this) seem to have some cognitive weirdness in that I often fail to notice information in headings, labels, title bars, subject lines, UI chrome, etc unless I actively look for it. Repeating the information in the body makes it easier for to read, at least for me.

> On Jun 20, 2018, at 10:25 AM, Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com> wrote:
> 
> Russ,
> 
> My understanding is that the following is all that is needed.
> 
> Add a new paragraph to the top of each of the sections which says
> 
> This section describes the changes that were made to S/MIME when it was upgraded from S/MIME 3.1 to S/MIME v3.2.
> 
> This means one is not reliant on the section title but it is part of the text.
> 
> Jim
> 
> 
> From: Russ Housley <housley@vigilsec.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 20, 2018 8:12 AM
> To: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
> Cc: Jim Schaad <ietf@augustcellars.com>; SPASM <spasm@ietf.org>; IESG <iesg@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [lamps] Ben Campbell's Yes on draft-ietf-lamps-rfc5750-bis-06: (with COMMENT)
> 
> Ben:
>> 
>>>> §1.4 (and subsequent change version): I infer from the section titles that the
>>>> normative keywords in these sections are intended to describe
>>>> requirements added to those versions, not new requirements in _this_
>>>> version. It would be better to make that explicit; the body text should stand
>>>> alone without the titles.
>>> 
>>> Yes that is what is intended to be said.  I agree and thus did not use keywords in section 1.6.
>>> 
>>> This is historic text copied from a previous version and as such I am slightly reluctant to change.
>>> EKR and Russ - what do you think?
>> 
>> It’s not a big deal one way or another, but a simple note that says “Version X.Y added the following:” would help.
> 
> I do not understand your suggestion.  This document specifies Version 4.0, and these sections describe the evolution from version 3 (the first one that the IETF produced) to this version.
> 
> 1.4.  Changes from S/MIME v3 to S/MIME v3.1
> 1.5.  Changes from S/MIME v3.1 to S/MIME v3.2
> 1.6.  Changes since S/MIME 3.2
> 
> Russ

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email