Subject: [Jmap] I-D Action: draft-ietf-jmap-smime-03.txt

From: [email-masked]
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 09:19:18 -0800

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.
This draft is a work item of the JSON Mail Access Protocol WG of the IETF.

        Title           : S/MIME signature verification extension to JMAP
        Author          : Alexey Melnikov
	Filename        : draft-ietf-jmap-smime-03.txt
	Pages           : 7
	Date            : 2021-03-12

Abstract:
   This document specifies an extension to JMAP for returning S/MIME
   signature verification status.

The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-jmap-smime/

There are also htmlized versions available at:
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-jmap-smime-03
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-jmap-smime-03

A diff from the previous version is available at:
https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-jmap-smime-03

Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission
until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at:
ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2021 17:21:52 +0000

Hi all,

I just updated this draft based on IETF 108 feedback and I now believe 
it is ready for WGLC.

Best Regards,

Alexey

On 12/03/2021 17:19, [email-masked] wrote:
> _______________________________________________
> Jmap mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap

---

From: "Bron Gondwana" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 17 Mar 2021 22:16:47 +1100

Hello all,

This email starts a working group last call for the smime draft at:

Alexey believes that this version (-03) resolves all the outstanding comments.  Please reply with any feedback during the next two weeks.  This last call will last until March 31st.

Regards,

Bron.

--
  Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd
  [email-masked]

---

From: "Neil Jenkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2021 14:44:29 +1100

I've read through this version and it seems fine. There are a few typos/grammar nits but I'm sure the RFC editors will pick those up. It might be worth adding a paragraph in the *Conventions* section like we did in 8621 <https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8621#section-1.1> to note that the type signatures syntax is from 8620.

Cheers,
Neil.