Subject: Re: Compression Content Type and RFC2630bis

From: [email-masked] (Peter Gutmann)
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 05:29:46 +1200 (NZST)

"Housley, Russ" <[email-masked]> writes:

>It has been suggested that since many of the other extensions to the CMS have
>been incorporated into RFC2630bis, and that the compression content type
>should be incorporated as well.  How does the working group feel about this
>suggestion?  Please let me know soon since this document is in WG Last Call.

Since this draft has been on tbe brink of being published as an RFC for over 1
1/2 years, and since there are already several implementations out there which
depend on it, I'd really like to see it finally published rather than reenter
the treadmill again waiting on 2630bis.

Peter.

---

From: "Housley, Russ" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 19 Sep 2001 14:12:25 -0400

Peter:

I was not suggesting that the current draft be stopped.  I would let the 
current document that is already with the IESG continue.  Then, simply 
consolidate in rfc2630bis.

Russ