Re: [ietf-822] message/partial - is it still a thing?

Richard Clayton <richard@highwayman.com> Fri, 22 February 2019 01:05 UTC

Return-Path: <richard@highwayman.com>
X-Original-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C404F1312E1 for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:05:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ktzb5eWIA0zy for <ietf-822@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:05:09 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.highwayman.com (happyday.demon.co.uk [80.177.121.10]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 142B3131316 for <ietf-822@ietf.org>; Thu, 21 Feb 2019 17:05:08 -0800 (PST)
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55907 helo=happyday.al.cl.cam.ac.uk) by mail.highwayman.com with esmtp (Exim 4.91) (envelope-from <richard@highwayman.com>) id 1gwzGz-000HYY-JH for ietf-822@ietf.org; Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:05:05 +0000
Message-ID: <UzBGqLEGq0bcFAjo@highwayman.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:04:06 +0000
To: ietf-822@ietf.org
From: Richard Clayton <richard@highwayman.com>
References: <32277.1550721800@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
In-Reply-To: <32277.1550721800@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Turnpike Integrated Version 5.03 M <bb9$+7$X77f$nNKLeSY+d+hkhZ>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf-822/i_Ffzdvh6kVVGOX0yZehkzDjroM>
Subject: Re: [ietf-822] message/partial - is it still a thing?
X-BeenThere: ietf-822@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of issues related to Internet Message Format \[RFC 822, RFC 2822, RFC 5322\]" <ietf-822.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf-822/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf-822@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-822>, <mailto:ietf-822-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2019 01:05:17 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In message <32277.1550721800@turing-police.cc.vt.edu>du>,
valdis.kletnieks@vt.edu writes

>Does any software out there still do message/partial?

mine does this just fine ... It's called Turnpike, but it's no longer
made available to new users -- it does both generating and reassembly on
receipt

>Is anything else out there able to do it, or is it time to heave it over the 
>side?

it was never widely possible to interwork with it and these days people
mail around multi-megabyte presentations without much difficulty (above
20MB you just don't reliably use email any more)

>(Probably need to double-check 'external-body' support too, but that's a 
>different
>kettle of fish...)

Turnpike supports doing a fetch but cannot generate such emails ... the
only place I have ever seen this used is in IETF emails reporting the
issuing of RFCs or I-Ds ... and they seem to have stopped doing this
some years back

>And if it's time to heave it over the side, should an RFC deprecating or moving
>it to 'Historic' be done?

I doubt anyone would implement either today, but making them Historic
would clarify that

- -- 
richard                                                   Richard Clayton

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary 
Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. Benjamin Franklin 11 Nov 1755

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGPsdk version 1.7.1

iQA/AwUBXG9KhTu8z1Kouez7EQLntACgi8GpOTxfgIdBJunWZPmoY+qKmIMAoMvy
pa2cJ6yDUi4ZByVBSH+Q/hrt
=L7/z
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----