IETF-66 S/MIME Minutes ---- The S/MIME WG meet for a one hour time slot on 13 Thursday 2006. Blake Ramsdell, the chair, opened the meeting by reviewing the agenda and there was no objection to it. About 20 people were in attendance. The current status of the drafts currently active in the working group: - GOST was published as RFC 4490. - SymKeyDist is still pinned by CMC, in PKIX, but CMC is now with the Security ADs so hopefully SymKeyDist will be unpinned soon. - KEM is still waiting on the ANSI X9.44 review process to be completed. - CadEs is completed and awaiting ESSCertId to be completed. - ESSCertId, MultiSign, and the 5 IBE drafts are separate topics on the agenda. The milestones were reviewed and updated to include the IBE drafts with the ultimate completion date of February 2007 for the 5 IBE drafts. One point raised during this discussion was whether the full list of CMS, CMSAlg, ESS, CERT, and MSG should be moved to Draft Standard. It was noted that a plenary discussion about many standards not progressing to Draft Standard was a problem and that when that is resolved our issue will be resolved. Russ Housley made a presentation about the changes necessary to clarify CMS on the issue of processing multiple signers signatures. The proposed text now indicates that when a signer includes more than one signature only one need validate, but there are environments where all of the signatures must be valid. Jim Schaad made a presentation about a draft that addresses a multiple signature attribute and the policy of processing multiple signatures. The ASN.1 and its general generation and processing rules were discussed. It was proposed that the draft should be ready for WG last call after 67. Jim Schaad also made a presentation on the status of the ESSCertID draft. Jim reviewed the ESSCertIDV2 ASN.1 and indicated that there are four outstanding comments that need to be resolved, primarily these are outstanding because they were not understood. Terence Spies made a presentation on the 5 new IBE drafts. An IBE architectural overview was provided and the interactions in the architecture explained where the other 4 drafts come to play. The IBCS describes the math, BfIBECMS describes how to use OtherRecipientInfo, IBEPKG describes an XML key request format, IBEPPS describes how to fetch a public parameter set. Terence indicated he was going to address the outstanding comments were: why some many drafts, fix some ASN.1 bugs, fix ASCII in the drafts, and IPR statements. He proposed combining the architecture, IBEPKG and IBEPPS in to one draft and he indicated that the IPR issue was being discussed by his company. Another point raised by Blake was whether there were other competing IBE protocols and that he did not want to see the S/MIME WG become the arguing ground for IBE. Terence indicated that there are other protocols out there and that the IBCS draft should point to the agreed ASNI IBE math. Sean Turner raised the issue about the IBEPKG draft uses an XML based query request/response format and whether that was appropriate in the S/MIME WG. The Security AD indicated that he was okay with the XML being present in the drafts.