ESMTP 8BITMIME downgrading

Ed Greshko <> Mon, 06 January 1997 10:14 UTC

Received: from cnri by id aa19046; 6 Jan 97 5:14 EST
Received: from by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa05698; 6 Jan 97 5:14 EST
Received: from localhost ( []) by (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA07672; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 04:40:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (8.7.6/8.6.12) with SMTP id EAA07660 for <>; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 04:40:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: from ( []) by (8.6.12+bestmx+oldruq+newsunq/8.6.12) with ESMTP id EAA04247 for <>; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 04:40:44 -0500
Received: from by; Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:39:20 +0800
Message-Id: <>
Date: Mon, 6 Jan 1997 17:34:09 +0800 (GMT)
Precedence: bulk
From: Ed Greshko <>
Subject: ESMTP 8BITMIME downgrading
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN


	Some supposedly MIME compliant UA, NetScape mail in particular,
can be made to generate 8bit data in the body as well as in headers.  This
seems especially true out here in Asia.  In the case of the headers they
are not generated to be RFC1522 compliant. 

	In the case of a gateway negociating ESMTP 8BITMIME it is clear
from RFC1652 what should occur in the case of the body of the message.
What is not addressed, or maybe I missed it, is what should be the action
on headers which contain 8bit data.

	Should the headers be MIME'd according to RFC1522?  If yes, then
what about the charset indicator?

	Any guidelines or suggestions?



Edward M. Greshko                  Technical Manager, Electronic Commerce
                                   Control Data Asia/Pacific Region
Voice: +886-2-715-2222 x287        6/F, 131 Nanking East Road, Section 3
FAX  : +886-2-712-9197             Taipei, Taiwan R.O.C