Folks,This may be too late (we are not sure whether the comment was sent in earlier or not), or may already have been dealt with.
However, a colleague has checked the ASN.1 and reports: "I have reviewed draft-ietf-smime-new-asn1-05.txt and also draft-ietf-pkix-new-asn1-05.txt because the smime IMPORTS from that. Everything seems to be OK. I have only one comment about draft-ietf-pkix-new-asn1-05.txt: in three places in OID values "member-body" is misspelled as "memberBody". Jean-Paul." John L Sean Turner wrote:
The SMIME WG did not meet in Stockholm.We have 8 IDs. Since the last meeting, 5 IDs have entered the RFC editor's queue raising the number of SMIME WG IDs with the RFC editor to 7:- draft-ietf-smime-multisig - draft-ietf-smime-sha2 - draft-ietf-smime-3850bis - draft-ietf-smime-3850bis - draft-ietf-smime-3278bis - draft-ietf-smime-new-asn1 - draft-ietf-smime-3852bisAll of the documents are pinned on documents from PKIX, the TLP revisions, or both.A new version of draft-ietf-smime-rsa-kem was posted to address comments made by Steve Kent during his SECDIR review. We issued a 2nd WGLC because the revisions were pretty substantial. One set of comments, which I would categorize as minor, was received during the 2nd WGLC. A new version will be posted, and then the document will passed to Tim Polk.Once all the documents have been published we will initiate the procedure to shut down the WG.spt
-- Prof John Larmouth Larmouth T&PDS Ltd (Training and Protocol Design Services Ltd)1 Blueberry Road Bowdon j.larmouth at btinternet.com
Altrincham CheshireWA14 3LS England
Tel: +44 161 928 1605
Note Well: Messages sent to this mailing list are the opinions of the senders and do not imply endorsement by the IETF.