- From: Martin Gudgin <mgudgin@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 09:04:29 -0800
- To: "Mark Nottingham" <mark.nottingham@bea.com>, <noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com>
- Cc: "Anish Karmarkar" <Anish.Karmarkar@oracle.com>, "Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org" <xml-dist-app@w3.org>
OK, I think I get it. Let's see... I have a jpeg with at the binary level is a bunch of octets and at the Infoset level is a bunch of base64 characters. when this goes over an 8-bit clean transport, it can go as binary and everything is fine. If it has to go over a none 8-bit clean transport then it will be CTEed to 7-bit ( or possible base64 or quoted-printable ). But at the binary level it's still the same bunch of octets and at the Infoset level it's the same bunch of base64 characters. So I think what it happening here is that when things are sent a binary ( and 8-bit? ) no encoding/decoding occurs at the MIME level. For 7-bit. base64 and quoted-printable encoding/decoding happens at the MIME layer. In all cases the octets at the layer above MIME are the same. Is this correct? Gudge > -----Original Message----- > From: Mark Nottingham [mailto:mark.nottingham@bea.com] > Sent: 07 January 2004 16:58 > To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com > Cc: Martin Gudgin; Anish Karmarkar; Xml-Dist-App@W3. Org > Subject: Re: Propsed new issue: variability of encoding in Miffy > > An example: > > I want to send a MIFFY-optimized SOAP message to Bob using a > Mail binding. To get to him, it'll have to go through the > following message > path: > > Me > --[SMTP]-->MyLocalServer--[SMTP]-->BobExternalServer-- > [PrivateMailProtocol]-->BobInternalServer--[POP]-->Bob > > Furthermore, let's imagine that the PrivateMailProtocol > between BobExternalServer and BobInternalServer can't handle > binary data; i.e., it's not 8-bit clean. Such things do > exist, especially in legacy enterprise mail systems. > > So, I can send a MIFFY-encoded document to my local server as > a multipart MIME message with binary attachments, and it will > work just fine. It can forward it to BobExternalServer > without any changes to the encoding. > > However, BobExternalServer is in a bit of a pickle; it's > acting as an SMTP gateway to a legacy system that can't > handle that message. In MIME, there's an easy solution to > this; Content-Transfer-Encoding, which allows you to encode > parts of the message so that they're safe for transport. > > If we disallow CTEs other than binary, BobExternalServer will > be forced to either refuse the message, or to understand > MIFFY and encode the message as an XML Infoset. Given that > deployment of MIME Content-Transfer-Encoding is pretty > universal (thanks to literally decades of coordination in the > IETF), and the footprint of MIFFY is currently exactly zero, > I think it's an easy choice. :) > > This isn't a problem in HTTP, because it doesn't have this > legacy. Of course, if HTTP gateways to another protocol, that > restriction won't apply, and I think that's a good thing (see above). > > -- > Mark Nottingham Principal Technologist > Office of the CTO BEA Systems > >
Received on Wednesday, 7 January 2004 12:04:32 UTC