Subject: draft-ietf-smime-3278bis-03 incremental review

From: Alfred Hönes <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 01:50:36 +0100 (MEZ)

Folks,
I have performed another (incremental) review of
      draft-ietf-smime-3278bis-03
and I apologize that it could not be completed in time.
Nevertheless, I hope it will still be useful.

The only significant proposal I have is based on the
observation that the change information vs. RFC 3278
has grown to an extent that it better should be moved
to the end of the document (new Appendix B ?).
The carefully collected information there should be kept
in this detail for historical record, and to educate
implementors tackling software updates, but it now seems
to over-stress the basic character of an Introduction.

Beyond that, I found a bunch of editorials that will be sent
off-list (ASAP, I hope tomorrow), after a final cross-checking
with Sean's summary posted on 6 Nov 2008 (to remove potential
redundancy).

My primary conclusion is that the draft should go ahead after
the next minor polishing update to address the comments.

Sean and Dan: please still be patient for the details to come.

Kind regards,
  Alfred Hönes.

-- 

+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| TR-Sys Alfred Hoenes   |  Alfred Hoenes   Dipl.-Math., Dipl.-Phys.  |
| Gerlinger Strasse 12   |  Phone: (+49)7156/9635-0, Fax: -18         |
| D-71254  Ditzingen     |  E-Mail:  [email-masked]                     |
+------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

---

From: "Turner, Sean P." <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 14 Nov 2008 13:32:53 -0500

Alfred,

I should have a version that incorporates all of you changes by the end of
next week.

spt 

>-----Original Message-----
>From: [email-masked] 
>[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Alfred HÎnes
>Sent: Thursday, November 13, 2008 7:51 PM
>To: [email-masked]
>Subject: draft-ietf-smime-3278bis-03 incremental review
>
>
>Folks,
>observation that the change information vs. RFC 3278 has grown 
>to an extent that it better should be moved to the end of the 
>document (new Appendix B ?).
>The carefully collected information there should be kept in 
>this detail for historical record, and to educate implementors 
>tackling software updates, but it now seems to over-stress the 
>basic character of an Introduction.
>
>  Alfred HÎnes.