Subject: [smime] some s/mime related drafts I've been asked to AD sponsor

From: Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 22:57:00 +0100

Folks,

Sean, Russ and Jim have authored three s/mime related drafts [1,2,3]
and asked me to sponsor them for publication. I've read them and
they seem like reasonable additions to the set of s/mime RFCs to
me, but I'd like to check that nobody has any issue with that
before starting IETF LC in a week or so.

I'd specifically be interested in hearing from anyone who'd
likely implement these. I'll send my own comments (which are
minor) during the IETF LC.

Thanks,
S.

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-turner-application-cms-media-type
[2]
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-housley-ct-keypackage-receipt-n-error
[3]
http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-turner-ct-keypackage-receipt-n-error-algs

---

From: Paul Hoffman <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 2 Sep 2013 15:23:15 -0700

S/MIMErs: please take a look at these and let the list know (a) if you have any concerns, (b) if you might implement them, or both.

--Paul Hoffman

On Sep 2, 2013, at 2:57 PM, Stephen Farrell <[email-masked]> wrote:

> _______________________________________________
> smime mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime
>

---

From: Carl Wallace <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 19:00:00 -0400

What was the criteria for selecting the items in the innermost content
type set included in [1]?  For example, why include TrustAnchorList
content type from 5914 but not the TAMP content types from 5934?

The interop considerations section states ContentInfo is always the
outermost structure.  Should RFC 4073 be updated to reflect this?

On 9/2/13 6:23 PM, "Paul Hoffman" <[email-masked]> wrote:

>S/MIMErs: please take a look at these and let the list know (a) if you
>have any concerns, (b) if you might implement them, or both.
>
>--Paul Hoffman
>

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 02 Sep 2013 19:55:53 -0400

> content type from 5914 but not the TAMP content types from 5934?

I didn't include the TAMP content types from RFC 5934 because they 
already had content types defined.  Maybe they should be added though.

> outermost structure.  Should RFC 4073 be updated to reflect this?

I'm checking with Russ but I didn't think that ContentCollection would 
be used without a ContentInfo wrapper.

spt

---

From: Sean Turner <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 20:14:30 -0400

> be used without a ContentInfo wrapper.

BTW - I checked with Russ and ContentInfo was always expected to be the 
outermost wrapper.

>>>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-turner-ct-keypackage-receipt-n-error-alg
>>>>
>>>> s
>>>>