< draft-ietf-smime-cert-07.txt		draft-ietf-smime-cert-08.txt >
	Internet Draft Editor: Blake Ramsdell,		Internet Draft Editor: Blake Ramsdell,
	draft-ietf-smime-cert-07.txt Worldtalk		draft-ietf-smime-cert-08.txt Worldtalk
	March 31, 1999		April 23, 1999
	Expires September 30, 1999		Expires October 23, 1999
	S/MIME Version 3 Certificate Handling		S/MIME Version 3 Certificate Handling
	Status of this memo		Status of this memo
	This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all		This document is an Internet-Draft and is in full conformance with all
	provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.		provisions of Section 10 of RFC2026.
	Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task		Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Task
	Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other		Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that other
	skipping to change at line 97 ¶		skipping to change at line 97 ¶
	1.2 Compatibility with Prior Practice of S/MIME		1.2 Compatibility with Prior Practice of S/MIME
	S/MIME version 3 agents should attempt to have the greatest		S/MIME version 3 agents should attempt to have the greatest
	interoperability possible with S/MIME version 2 agents. S/MIME version		interoperability possible with S/MIME version 2 agents. S/MIME version
	2 is described in RFC 2311 through RFC 2315, inclusive. RFC 2311 also		2 is described in RFC 2311 through RFC 2315, inclusive. RFC 2311 also
	has historical information about the development of S/MIME.		has historical information about the development of S/MIME.
	1.3 Terminology		1.3 Terminology
	Throughout this draft, the terms MUST, MUST NOT, SHOULD, and SHOULD		The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
	NOT are used in capital letters. This conforms to the definitions in		"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
	[MUSTSHOULD]. [MUSTSHOULD] defines the use of these key words to help		document are to be interpreted as described in [MUSTSHOULD].
	make the intent of standards track documents as clear as possible. The
	same key words are used in this document to help implementors achieve
	interoperability.
	1.4 Discussion of This Draft		1.4 Discussion of This Draft
	This draft is being discussed on the "ietf-smime" mailing list.		This draft is being discussed on the "ietf-smime" mailing list.
	To subscribe, send a message to:		To subscribe, send a message to:
	ietf-smime-request@imc.org		ietf-smime-request@imc.org
	with the single word		with the single word
	subscribe		subscribe
	in the body of the message. There is a Web site for the mailing list		in the body of the message. There is a Web site for the mailing list
	at <http://www.imc.org/ietf-smime/>.		at <http://www.imc.org/ietf-smime/>.
	skipping to change at line 496 ¶		skipping to change at line 493 ¶
	[X.509] ITU-T Recommendation X.509 (1997) | ISO/IEC 9594-8:1997,		[X.509] ITU-T Recommendation X.509 (1997) | ISO/IEC 9594-8:1997,
	Information technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory:		Information technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory:
	Authentication framework		Authentication framework
	[X.520] ITU-T Recommendation X.520 (1997) | ISO/IEC 9594-6:1997,		[X.520] ITU-T Recommendation X.520 (1997) | ISO/IEC 9594-6:1997,
	Information technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory:		Information technology - Open Systems Interconnection - The Directory:
	Selected attribute types.		Selected attribute types.
	B. Acknowledgements		B. Acknowledgements
	<TBD>		Many thanks go out to the other authors of the S/MIME v2 RFC: Steve
			Dusse, Paul Hoffman and Jeff Weinstein. Without v2, there wouldn't be
			a v3.
			A number of the members of the S/MIME Working Group have also worked
			very hard and contributed to this document. Any list of people is
			doomed to omission and for that I apologize. In alphabetical order,
			the following people stand out in my mind due to the fact that they
			made direct contributions to this document.
			Bill Flanigan
			Elliott Ginsburg
			Paul Hoffman
			Russ Housley
			Michael Myers
			John Pawling
			Denis Pinkas
			Jim Schaad
	C. Changes from last draft		C. Changes from last draft
	Changed "I-D" to "document" in section 1 (Russ Housley)		Changed section 1.3 to contain correct reference language for
	Added clarification to section 3.1 regarding emailAddress attribute		MUSTSHOULD (Thomas Narten)
	from PKCS #9 (Russ Housley)		Changed section D to update author's address (Blake Ramsdell)
	Redid 4.4.2.1 regarding Diffie-Hellman to clarify "doneness" (Russ		Changed <TBD> in section B to actual list (Blake Ramsdell)
	Housley)
	Clarified 4.4 regarding certificate extensions and profiling efforts
	(Russ Housley)
	Clarified 2.3 regarding DSA parameters being scattered all over the
	certificate chain, necessitating the transmission of the root
	certificate (Jim Schaad)
	Clarified 4.4.1 regarding basic constraints in end entity certificates
	(Jim Schaad)
	Changed an errant reference to [KEYM] to [SMIME-MSG] (Jim Schaad)
	Removed certificate request language from section 1 (Jim Schaad)
	Removed [CRMF] reference from section A (Jim Schaad)
	Added reference to PKCS #1 v2 and DSS for signature algorithms in
	section 4.3 (Jim Schaad)
	Fixed some language in 4.4 regarding syntax and semantics of
	extensions are defined in [KEYM] (Jim Schaad)
	Changed back the errant reference to [KEYM] (John Pawling)
	Promoted section 3.1 to section 3 (Paul Hoffman)
	Added CRL processing clarification to 2.1 and 4.1 (WG Consensus "after
	much exciting debate" initiated by Denis Pinkas)
	D. Editor’s address		D. Editor’s address
	Blake Ramsdell		Blake Ramsdell
	Worldtalk		Worldtalk
	13122 NE 20th St., Suite C		17720 NE 65th St Ste 201
	Bellevue, WA 98005		Redmond, WA 98052
	(425) 882-8861		+1 425 376 0225
	blaker@deming.com		blaker@deming.com
End of changes. 5 change blocks.
	36 lines changed or deleted		31 lines changed or added
This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.48. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/