Object Identifier Registry for the S/MIME Mail Security Working Group
RFC 7107
Yes
No Objection
Note: This ballot was opened for revision 00 and is now closed.
(Richard Barnes; former steering group member) Yes
(Sean Turner; former steering group member) Yes
(Stephen Farrell; former steering group member) Yes
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?
(Adrian Farrel; former steering group member) No Objection
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.
(Barry Leiba; former steering group member) No Objection
(Brian Haberman; former steering group member) No Objection
(Gonzalo Camarillo; former steering group member) No Objection
(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection
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.
(Joel Jaeggli; former steering group member) No Objection
(Martin Stiemerling; former steering group member) No Objection
(Pete Resnick; former steering group member) No Objection
(Stewart Bryant; former steering group member) No Objection
(Ted Lemon; former steering group member) No Objection