Re: Second Last Call: rfc3852 (Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS)) to Draft Standard

[Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx>]

The IESG wrote:

> The IESG has received a request from the smime WG (smime) to consider 
> the following document:
>
> - 'Cryptographic Message Syntax (CMS) '
>  RFC 3852 as a Draft Standard
>
> No technical issues were raised during the first Last Call.  However, the
> Last Call failed to highlight two normative references to standards track
> documents of lower maturity:  RFCs 3280 and 3281.
>  
Speaking as a member of the IETF community I find the question 
confusing, considering that both documents were obsoleted (or just about 
to be obsoleted in case of RFC 3281). Shouldn't this be RFC 5280 and 
draft-ietf-pkix-3281update-04.txt?

> This abbreviated Last Call is focused solely on whether downrefs to these
> Proposed Standards are appropriate in the context of RFC 3852.
>