On Feb 16, 2006, at 11:12, Magnus Westerlund wrote:
Sally Floyd wrote:
So this could be either a new CCID, or a negotiated variant of CCID3.
In terms of implementation, I think it makes more sense to think of
it as a negotiated variant of CCID3, but in terms of API interfaces,
it is probably more straightforward to present it as a new CCID.
Yes?  No?

Isn't it easier to negotiate if it is given its own CCID? Using yet another level of negotiation seems counter productive and may increase the delay.

I also think a new CCID may be most appropriate.

(chair hat off)

Lars
--
Lars Eggert                                     NEC Network Laboratories


Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to