Re: WG LAST CALL: draft-ietf-smime-rfc2633bis-07.txt

[Russ Housley <housley@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hare are seven comments.  I think number 6 is the most significant one, but 
none of them are show stoppers.

1.  Should Section 1.4 reference RFC 3369?

2.  Delete section 1.6 before the document is sent to the IESG.

3.  Section 2.4 probably should point out that ContentInfo is needed to 
encapsulate each of the protection content types.

4.  What compression algorithm MUST be implemented if CompressedData is 
supported?

5.  Section 2.5.2: s/SMIMECapabilities attribute should/SMIMECapabilities 
attribute SHOULD/

6.  Section 2.6:  the first two paragraphs are not clear.  S/MIME v3.1 MUST 
support both issuerAndSerialNumber and subjectKeyIdentifier for sending and 
receiving.

7.  Section 3.4.3.2: s/not currently supported in S/MIME/not currently 
recommended in S/MIME/

Russ