Protocol Action: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies to Draft Standard
The IESG <iesg-secretary@CNRI.Reston.VA.US> Wed, 28 August 1996 14:56 UTC
Received: from ietf.org by ietf.org id aa17258; 28 Aug 96 10:56 EDT
Received: from localhost by ietf.org id aa17167; 28 Aug 96 10:54 EDT
To: IETF-Announce:;
Cc: RFC Editor <rfc-editor@isi.edu>
Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab@isi.edu>
Cc: ietf-822@dimacs.rutgers.edu
Sender: ietf-announce-request@ietf.org
From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>
Subject: Protocol Action: Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies to Draft Standard
Date: Wed, 28 Aug 1996 10:54:54 -0400
X-Orig-Sender: scoya@ietf.org
Message-ID: <9608281054.aa17167@ietf.org>
The IESG has approved the Internet-Drafts for publication: 1. Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies" <draft-ietf-822ext-mime-imb-07.txt> for the status of Draft Standard. 2. Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Two: Media Types <draft-ietf-822ext-mime-imt-05.txt> for the status of Draft Standard. 3. MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) Part Three: Message Header Extensions for Non-ASCII Text <draft-ietf-822ext-mime-hdrs-00.txt for the status of Draft Standard 4. Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures <draft-ietf-822ext-mime-reg-04.txt> for the status of Best Current Practice. 5. Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Five: Conformance Criteria and Examples <draft-ietf-822ext-mime-conf-06.txt> for the status of Draft Standard These documents are not the product of an active working group, but have been reviewed in the IETF. The IESG contact persons are Keith Moore and Harald Alvestrand. Technical Summary These specifications together clarify the MIME specifications. The BCP document clarifies and revises the process for registering MIME types considerably. There are no new features added to the protocol by this revision. Working Group Summary There was no significant dissent on the mailing lists polled. Protocol Quality The protocols have been reviewed for the IESG by Harald T. Alvestrand