Than you Wassim for your review. > Minor issues: IMHO, it makes sense to better clarify the connection to the > two RFCs 2767 and 3338 as the draft states that it "obsoletes" them in the > abstract, "updates" them in the Introduction, is a "direct update to and > directly derivative" from them (sub-section 1.1), then "combines and > obsoletes" them in section 8.
This obsoletes, hence we could maybe state in the 1.1 acknowledgement
section as:
"This document is a derivative from ..." (and not say update/obsolete in
that section)
In essence this document copy-pastes a lot of content from those RFCs, and
then makes quite some changes.
Best regards,
Teemu
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ Gen-art mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art
