Re: HTTP Encrypted Content-Encoding

Sean Turner <[email protected]> Wed, 1 Apr 2015 18:03:35 -0400
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.smime
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Apr 01, 2015, at 17:12, Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Apr 1, 2015, at 11:16 AM, Martin Thomson <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>> It was suggested by Paul that I seek feedback on this work here.
>> 
>> Here:
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-nottingham-http-encryption-encoding
>> 
>> Updated, not submitted, version:
>> https://github.com/mnot/I-D/blob/master/http-encryption-encoding/draft.md
>> 
>> It doesn't have any ASN.1 or OIDs, sorry.  And no prizes for finding
>> the bug in the published version.
> 
> In particular, I think that CMS encrypted types might be useful here to give them more flexibility than what they have now, and so they don't eventually have to reinvent a bunch of CMS. It also might be overkill. Thoughts?

There’s also these media type registrations but it definitely assumes CMS:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc7193/?include_text=1

But isn’t this kind of re-inventing some parts of S-HTTP ;)
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc2660/?include_text=1

spt
_______________________________________________
smime mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/smime