Subject: Update of CMS-X.400 Drafts

From: "Bonatti, Chris" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 9 Aug 2003 11:31:33 -0400

With Paul and Anders help, I have addressed some outstanding IESG (or
AD) comments that I did not hear of until after the Vienna meeting.  The
comments and their resolution are included below.  I also updated WRAP
so that it includes a specification of AES key sizes in alignment with
the -05 issue of MSGbis.  This latter issue was mentioned in my status
report in Vienna.

So you should look for an -08 issue of WRAP and an -09 issue of
TRANSPORT in the Internet-Drafts directory in short order (posted Friday
AM).

Cheers!
Chris

______WRAP COMMENTS________

3.2----->"whatever gateway system that is bridging" seems grammatically
wrong.

Replaced with "any gateway system that might bridge the gap".

3.2.1---->"since it is out" should be "since it is outside"?

Done.

3.3----->"If other binary transport" should "If another binary"?

Replaced with "If other transport (e.g., X.400) that is optimized for
binary content".  I think that's clearer.

3.3.1------> "it is out" again, outside?

Done.

3.4.1---> "7-bit transport, is optional" spurious comma.

Done.

3.4.1--->"certs-only, which is only for signed)" seems to be missing a
noun.

Replaced with "certs-only, which applies only to signed-only messages)".

______TRANSPORT COMMENTS________

2.6.1--->"because those type do not" has subject/verb agreeement
problem.

Changed "type" to "types".

2.6.2-----> "A RecipeintInfo" should be "RecipientInfo".

Done.