W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-discuss@w3.org > November 2001

Re: canonical MIME headers

From: Steve Hole <steve.hole@messagingdirect.com>
Date: Fri, 9 Nov 2001 13:12:17 -0700
To: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Cc: "Donald E. Eastlake 3rd" <dee3@torque.pothole.com>, ned.freed@mrochek.com, James M Galvin <galvin@elistx.com>, discuss@apps.ietf.org
Message-ID: <EXECMAIL.20011109131217.N692@kepler.esys.ca>
On Fri, 09 Nov 2001 14:20:26 -0500 Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu> wrote:

> while Ned is correct that there's no need to do this when downgrading
> from 8bit/binary/q-p to base64 because multipart boundaries inherently
> cannot be confused with base64, there are re-encoders that can "upgrade"
> as well as "downgrade", and which use the same code path to convert from 
> one encoding to another regardless of whether the destination is base64.  
> for those re-encoders it's easier to always rewrite boundary markers.

OK, I understand that.   But, if we have per-part MIC's calculated, why do
we care whether boundary markers are rewritten or not?

Cheers.

---
Steve Hole
Chief Technology Officer -  - Billing and Payment Systems
ACI Worldwide - MessagingDirect
<mailto:Steve.Hole@MessagingDirect.com>
Phone: 780-424-4922
Received on Friday, 9 November 2001 15:37:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 23 March 2006 20:11:29 GMT