Skip to main content

IETF conflict review for draft-cailleux-secure-headers
conflict-review-cailleux-secure-headers-00

Yes

(Pete Resnick)
(Richard Barnes)

No Objection

(Adrian Farrel)
(Alia Atlas)
(Alissa Cooper)
(Brian Haberman)
(Jari Arkko)
(Joel Jaeggli)
(Kathleen Moriarty)
(Martin Stiemerling)
(Spencer Dawkins)
(Ted Lemon)

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.

Ballot question: "Is this the correct conflict review response?"

Barry Leiba Former IESG member
Yes
Yes (2014-08-13) Unknown
I think this doesn't add enough that's useful beyond what S/MIME already does, with "The sending client MAY wrap a full MIME [RFC 2045] message in a message/rfc822 wrapper in order to apply S/MIME security services to header fields," and I don't think the document makes a compelling case.  I don't think this proposal is likely to see much implementation.

All that said, I don't think there's any harm, and some people might find it useful.  No conflict with IETF work that I can see, so let's give it a shot.
Pete Resnick Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Richard Barnes Former IESG member
Yes
Yes () Unknown

                            
Adrian Farrel Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Alia Atlas Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Alissa Cooper Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Brian Haberman Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Jari Arkko Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Joel Jaeggli Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Kathleen Moriarty Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Martin Stiemerling Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Spencer Dawkins Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown

                            
Stephen Farrell Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection (2014-08-21) Unknown
I agree with Barry. I suspect we'd not standardise exactly this
but no harm that someone plays with it.
Ted Lemon Former IESG member
No Objection
No Objection () Unknown