Re: [apps-discuss] seeking pragmatic guidelines for content-type'structure': when to go top-level?

Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com> Fri, 11 November 2011 20:43 UTC

Return-Path: <nico@cryptonector.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B90A21F8B5B for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:43:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.931
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.931 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.046, BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 1XUnYTfLjuox for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:43:59 -0800 (PST)
Received: from homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (caiajhbdcahe.dreamhost.com [208.97.132.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 087FA21F8A62 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:43:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-gx0-f172.google.com (mail-gx0-f172.google.com [209.85.161.172]) (using TLSv1 with cipher RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: nico@cryptonector.com) by homiemail-a16.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9E09750807D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:43:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by ggnr4 with SMTP id r4so3597491ggn.31 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:43:57 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.68.39.34 with SMTP id m2mr27092868pbk.75.1321044236739; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:43:56 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.68.40.162 with HTTP; Fri, 11 Nov 2011 12:43:56 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <019201cca0a2$ed2e91a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
References: <4EBB3CFC.5050608@dcrocker.net> <4EBB5310.6080103@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <CAC4RtVBNL_nTCwBsMQpEKS9kXUF7aj9yEstef7yrzwi8qYAQDg@mail.gmail.com> <4EBB7660.6040904@dcrocker.net> <013101cc9f8b$2e1fac80$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net> <01O89GUH11DU00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <019201cca0a2$ed2e91a0$4001a8c0@gateway.2wire.net>
Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 14:43:56 -0600
Message-ID: <CAK3OfOhRKpsh9OkLSo=PGJhe4JRFwXO9bbg6sPn6jTxnRiPaQQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Nico Williams <nico@cryptonector.com>
To: Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] seeking pragmatic guidelines for content-type'structure': when to go top-level?
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Nov 2011 20:43:59 -0000

Maybe we should standardize file(1) magic, create a file magic
registry, and be done.

Nico
--