Subject: RE: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-smime-x400wrap-00.txt

From: Graeme Lunt <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 10:53:00 -0000

Chris,

> I'm going to have to check up on your other comments, but 
> this one has an immediate answer.  The reason that the ASN.1 
> encoding is a SHOULD and not a MUST is that X.400 allows 
> non-ASN.1 content.  

Fair point!

Maybe a better wording is to say that:

"this X.400 content SHOULD maintain the encoding defined by the 
content type" 

rather than implying that an ASN.1 encoding should be used if 
possible?

Graeme

---

From: "Bonatti, Chris" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 16 Nov 2000 09:39:57 -0500

> rather than implying that an ASN.1 encoding should be used if

Okay, that makes good sense.

Chris