Subject: Seeking comments on draft-ietf-smime-new-asn1-00.txt and draft-ietf-pkix-new-asn1-00.txt

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 14:36:25 -0800

I would like to send this to the S/MIME and PKIX mailing lists. Thoughts?

--Paul

Greetings again. Jim Schaad and I have produced these two documents 
as WG items, based on the discussion last month in Vancouver. They 
include corrections to our original personal drafts, and some new 
modules. We actively seek comments on these two drafts.

One of the biggest questions is, which RFCs should and should not be 
in the draft? This breaks down into some sub-questions:

- Should we include only standards-track RFCs? What about 
Informational RFCs that came from a WG or were heavily vetted by a WG?

- Should we include RFCs that could benefit from new object classes 
but do not actually need to be updated in order to comply with the 
new ASN.1? Asked another way, should a module that did not contain an 
ANY be included?

- Should we create a module that is just the OIDs assigned across all 
the other modules? Should we create two (one for S/MIME, one for 
PKIX), or just a single OIDs module?

Again, we look forward to the discussion.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 15:26:09 -0800

At 6:00 PM -0500 1/10/08, Stephen Kent wrote:
>At 2:36 PM -0800 1/10/08, Paul Hoffman wrote:
>you just did send it :-).

Well, now everyone can tell that I got Jim's approval before sending it off...

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--VPN Consortium

---

From: Stephen Kent <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2008 18:00:46 -0500

Steve