IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Feedback on multipart/form-data

Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> Thu, 19 September 2013 13:40 UTC

Return-Path: <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
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 1812B21F9323 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 06:40:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -105.537
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.537 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.938, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 BfasWplVSCMO for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 06:40:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.15.18]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3BF7221F942D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 06:40:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [192.168.2.117] ([93.217.69.230]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Lskr7-1W2TWm1Txp-012FkZ for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:40:46 +0200
Message-ID: <523AFED3.5040404@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 15:40:35 +0200
From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Dave Cridland <dave@cridland.net>
References: <phSQWY29ag6ikEXv2E8eiO2imAHxaDkdDsncQPWozmvQ0rSYY@smtp.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <phSQWY29ag6ikEXv2E8eiO2imAHxaDkdDsncQPWozmvQ0rSYY@smtp.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:p5FcHe9O/iVoq0QC7Q9iDjPR9521llrZVLs3aDiJ9Z/VGgJSTYr xeRzBBr/6070bLQDuWm5luBaJuwh/taw4MOfYuuZ+wWF7bTWJHAB/tz6tajWuE0uojmsS4p DVl5ZVcfSfdsrgl3LdsFaKgLklQToSrKAln62T8PnBfGFRwO3fE7MQw/eLxhMkO5TRez86n yj7S18mMqrA3q8rKJtgMw==
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Feedback on multipart/form-data
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: Thu, 19 Sep 2013 13:40:55 -0000

On 2013-09-19 15:29, Dave Cridland wrote:
> Julian Reschke wrote:
>>>
>>>     I know of RFC 2047 and RFC 2231, as well as unencoded UTF-8 and
>>>     unencoded ISO-8859-1 (I think).
>>
>> No surprise here
>
> Yes, but one wonders if the unencoded UTF-8 actually does any harm at
> all in a 8bit/binary-safe protocol like HTTP.
>
> If most processors accept this - and I have no idea - it might even be
> useful to document.

The risk here is that some UAs send ISO-8859-1 (or something based on 
the locale), and servers parse based on the User-Agent. We have the same 
problem with the Content-Disposition response header field.

It's hard to change these kinds of workarounds in deployed code, and 
that's why a new mechanism that can't be confused with the old syntax 
may work better (thus RFC 5987).

Best regards, Julian

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email