IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: nonexistent-WG Last Call on MIME documents

Rens Troost <rens@name.net> Wed, 19 June 1996 21:05 UTC

Received: from ietf.cnri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07532; 19 Jun 96 17:05 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa07528; 19 Jun 96 17:05 EDT
Received: from list.cren.net by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa27900; 19 Jun 96 17:05 EDT
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by list.cren.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA16371; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:52:07 -0400
Received: from name.net (mikado.name.net [204.50.44.10]) by list.cren.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA16338 for <ietf-822@list.cren.net>; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:51:53 -0400
Received: from engine.name.net (engine.name.net [204.50.44.14]) by name.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with ESMTP id QAA26814; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:51:52 -0400
Received: from localhost.name.net (localhost.name.net [127.0.0.1]) by engine.name.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id QAA08348; Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:51:51 -0400
Message-Id: <199606192051.QAA08348@engine.name.net>
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:51:51 -0400
X-Orig-Sender: owner-ietf-822@list.cren.net
Precedence: bulk
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Rens Troost <rens@name.net>
To: hansen@pegasus.att.com
Cc: ietf-822@list.cren.net
Subject: Re: nonexistent-WG Last Call on MIME documents
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:07:00 EDT." <9606192015.AA24952@ig4.att.att.com>
X-Authentication-Warning: engine.name.net: Host localhost.name.net didn't use HELO protocol
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.0 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN

> Date: Wed, 19 Jun 1996 16:07 EDT
> Sender: owner-ietf-822@list.cren.net
> Precedence: bulk
> From: hansen@pegasus.att.com
> To: ietf-822@list.cren.net
> Subject: Re: nonexistent-WG Last Call on MIME documents
> Content-Type: text
> X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.0 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
> 
> < the time has come to move on the next step of the MIME documents.
> 
> The only problem I have with the proposed documents is the lack of treatment
> of the content-disposition header. Rfc 1806 needs to be moved into the
> standards track along with these MIME documents. The features of MIME which
> were removed in favor of placing them in the content-disposition header
> (e.g., Content-Type: name= -> Content-Disposition: filename=) are needed in
> the community, and we need a standards track method of dealing with those
> features.
> 
> 					Tony Hansen
> 			  hansen@pegasus.att.com, tony@attmail.com
> 		    http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Tony_Hansen
> 



I have a draft with a couple of added features (file modes, etc.) If
there are no objectiosn Ill submit it. It dawns on me I was going to
do that before the LAST ietf. Ugh. time flies.

-Res

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email