W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > ietf-http-wg-old@w3.org > January to April 1997

Re: MIME multipart/* vs HTTP

From: Scott Lawrence <lawrence@agranat.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Apr 1997 12:50:34 -0400
Message-Id: <199704301650.MAA29461@devnix.agranat.com>
To: Dave Kristol <dmk@bell-labs.com>
Cc: http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com
X-Mailing-List: <http-wg@cuckoo.hpl.hp.com> archive/latest/3170

>>>>> "DK" == Dave Kristol <dmk@bell-labs.com> writes:

DK> In my ignorance of MIME, I've been puzzled about this boundary
DK> business.  Assuming each multipart contains a Content-Length header,
DK> does it matter what the boundary is?  Can't the recipient just eat the
DK> number of content bytes before looking for the next boundary?  If so,
DK> the boundary strings don't have to be particularly clever, do they?

  I had also considered the use of Content-Length to address this; the
  HTTP spec seems to allow it:

2068> 19.4.5 HTTP Header Fields in Multipart Body-Parts

2068>    In MIME, most header fields in multipart body-parts are generally
2068>    ignored unless the field name begins with "Content-". In HTTP/1.1,
2068>    multipart body-parts may contain any HTTP header fields which are
2068>    significant to the meaning of that part.

  So is it legal for me to put an HTTP/1.1 Content-Length header into
  a multipart/* part to indicate its length?  It seems a workable (in
  fact, preferable) solution.  As server vendors we can't assume that

Scott Lawrence           EmWeb Embedded Server       <lawrence@agranat.com>
Agranat Systems, Inc.        Engineering            http://www.agranat.com/
Received on Wednesday, 30 April 1997 09:54:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:40:19 UTC