Re: [VCARDDAV] Signed vCards

Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com> Thu, 04 July 2013 12:56 UTC

Return-Path: <lear@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1179721F91A5 for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 05:56:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -110.435
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-110.435 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.164, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id FG16Jx1yBGBU for <vcarddav@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 05:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ams-iport-4.cisco.com (ams-iport-4.cisco.com [144.254.224.147]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6A63221F9EA3 for <vcarddav@ietf.org>; Thu, 4 Jul 2013 05:56:27 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=840; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1372942587; x=1374152187; h=message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:cc:subject: references:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=hqwUurSrJRoUhhPxPHWlkgS5apdDMMi7cVoxmtBQGrg=; b=b0KJYEtaO5ZmBDpdj74z/Q07nba8isnjTwCBYmTYgki9IFH8Wz6AHC/t hPLxO6z6IwAptMLAbAGzSRuSdEEdgnP/54f5ZP9J4Ym7Bktisl8sv9r39 4YLsv+VqXYnKgHx8g6HX3imy3zBBPv4FQT79+X9ohsIMki1PkFEil9kKd A=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AjwFADlw1VGQ/khL/2dsb2JhbABagwkyQ4JHR702gQUWdIIjAQEBBCNVARALGAICBRYLAgIJAwIBAgFFBg0BBwEBBYgGB6kVkRqBJo5FB4JRgRwDl0mMI4UigxM6
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.87,995,1363132800"; d="scan'208";a="15313567"
Received: from ams-core-2.cisco.com ([144.254.72.75]) by ams-iport-4.cisco.com with ESMTP; 04 Jul 2013 12:56:22 +0000
Received: from ams3-vpn-dhcp5931.cisco.com (ams3-vpn-dhcp5931.cisco.com [10.61.87.42]) by ams-core-2.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id r64CuKGb006074 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 4 Jul 2013 12:56:21 GMT
Message-ID: <51D570F4.1020204@cisco.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 14:56:20 +0200
From: Eliot Lear <lear@cisco.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.8; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130620 Thunderbird/17.0.7
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: DataPacRat <datapacrat@gmail.com>
References: <CAB5WduA09GVZ7j2q4e9aM-CYBj27_deKT=VHhVL0+gzG1yRq0A@mail.gmail.com> <CAD6ztsqqQwbN_-yv9+-tHuh8X1MfBRKEqF6ugH=0avHTuKxzWA@mail.gmail.com> <CAB5WduCO7mNPAqgqYWXmceog3wVNox5reUAjsCQRUXRQB0Wftw@mail.gmail.com> <51D18BC4.5030300@cisco.com> <CAB5WduAJSiqEjsw+DUo4Emy-Tw30nTw1WA2MshxJAfHN1sh0WA@mail.gmail.com> <51D1A52C.6000806@viagenie.ca> <CAB5WduDEe+tC21L6AbW0HRzTf5Z6L0oCA+M4X8_p1ERK0rFPtA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAB5WduDEe+tC21L6AbW0HRzTf5Z6L0oCA+M4X8_p1ERK0rFPtA@mail.gmail.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "vcarddav@ietf.org" <vcarddav@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [VCARDDAV] Signed vCards
X-BeenThere: vcarddav@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF vcarddav wg mailing list <vcarddav.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/vcarddav>
List-Post: <mailto:vcarddav@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/vcarddav>, <mailto:vcarddav-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Jul 2013 12:56:32 -0000

Hi,

On 7/4/13 5:56 AM, DataPacRat wrote:
> On a somewhat related subject, I'm still new to the IETF, and still
> going through various semi-relevant RFCs. If nobody minds my asking;
> once the general back-and-forth on the idea seems done, and the
> significant feedback has been fed... what would the most appropriate
> next step be? Should I start writing up a preliminary draft all by
> myself, or make some sort of official proposal to the working group,
> or let someone else take the lead, or...?
>

First, I would like to refer you to the Tao of the IETF.  It gives a
pretty good feel for how we do things.  Beyond that, a draft is always
welcome.  I think it would be useful to explain in that draft why
neither an S/MIME nor a PGP encrypted/signed object would do the job.

http://www.ietf.org/tao.html

Eliot