Object Identifier Registry for the S/MIME Mail Security Working Group
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.
(Richard Barnes) Yes
(Stephen Farrell) Yes
Comment (2013-11-18 for -00)
Just minor suggestions, feel free to ignore: - General: Maybe say that changing these OIDs would have a bad effect on interop, since there are some folks who don't seem to get that? - section 3: Do you mean the expert should only accept stuff that'd have been ok with some historical charter for the smime wg? "Strongly related" seems somewhat vague. Given the very broad range of existing OIDs, what would not fit? Would some more guidance help the expert?
(Sean Turner) Yes
(Jari Arkko) No Objection
Comment (2013-11-21 for -00)
There is, however, a good comment from Suresh Krishnan on his Gen-ART review. Please make sure it is handled before we pass the document to the RFC Editor.
(Stewart Bryant) No Objection
(Gonzalo Camarillo) No Objection
(Adrian Farrel) No Objection
Comment (2013-11-20 for -00)
I have no objection but I note that according to 5226: The required documentation and review criteria for use by the Designated Expert should be provided when defining the registry. This document gives the review criteria (thanks) but is silent on "documentation". Possibly silence means no documentation is needed, but it would be nice to make that explicit.