Re: Secure ???? over the Internet

[Mats Jansson <mjansson@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

>X-Sender: t3125rm@pop3hub.is.chrysler.com
>Date: Tue, 21 May 1996 06:50:19 -0400
>To: Mats Jansson <mjansson@agathon.com>, ietf-ediint@imc.org
>From: Robert Moskowitz <rgm3@chrysler.com>
>Subject: Re: Secure ???? over the Internet
>
>At 11:08 PM 5/20/96 -0700, Mats Jansson wrote:
>>
>>What more beyond an e-mail address would you need in the scenario we are
>talking
>>about (EDI over SMTP)?
>
>WAKE UP CALL # 1
>
>First of all, our industry may very well NOT USE SMTP, but rather HTTP!

Our working group agreed two months ago to tackle http and ftp later, if there
was a need to and enough interest.  At the time, there wasn't.
>
>WAKE UP CALL # 2
>
>Secondly in a message queing EDI network like the one you are proposing
>based on SMTP, the identifier may well be the trading partner # which might
>be the ISO ASN.1 WTO code, much like what STEP has decided to use.  It
>brakes down a lot of international barriers.

??? "identifier"
??? "trading partner #"
??? please define, I'm lost
>
>There is no reason to expect that the signature has any relationship with
>the mail header.  This is part of the reason why I have argued with the
>S/MIME people that the signature must be hidable in the secure envelope.
>Which they cannot do.

I agree, there is no reason.  Did I argue that?  You could do anything you
want with aliases.

>
>Robert Moskowitz
>Chrysler Corporation
>(810) 758-8212
>
>
******************************
Mats Jansson
LiNK
415-780-9039
mjansson@agathon.com