Re: dropping MgmtData?

[ Moved over from xml-encryption@w3.org (Donald, your other post is there too) ]

I agree with dropping it. If mgmtdata is to be used in a proprietary
way, then better that people must define their own proprietary element
to do the job.

Merlin

r/dee3@torque.pothole.com/2001.05.30/12:42:12
>
>The MgmtData element has no defined internal structure and is just
>described as providing in-band key distribution related information
>such as encrypted key or key agreement information. This is clearly
>not interoperable without further definition.
>
>In the XML Encryption WG, EncryptedKey and AgreementMethod elements
>are being defined which offer interoperabile ways to do these things.
>Given this, is there any reason to keep MgmtData in the standard? If
>there is someone using it, it could be moved to the additional URIs
>draft.  In any case, I believe its use should be deprecated and use of
>the potentially interoperable methods being defined in the XML
>Encryption WG encouraged.
>
>Thanks,
>Donald
>=====================================================================
> Donald E. Eastlake 3rd                      dee3@torque.pothole.com
> 155 Beaver Street                                +1 508-634-2066(h)
> Milford, MA 01757 USA                            +1 508-261-5434(w)
>


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Baltimore Technologies plc will not be liable for direct,  special,  indirect 
or consequential  damages  arising  from  alteration of  the contents of this
message by a third party or as a result of any virus being passed on.

In addition, certain Marketing collateral may be added from time to time to
promote Baltimore Technologies products, services, Global e-Security or
appearance at trade shows and conferences.

This footnote confirms that this email message has been swept by
Baltimore MIMEsweeper for Content Security threats, including
computer viruses.
   http://www.baltimore.com