IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Parsing the Injection-Info: header field

Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <antti-juhani@kaijanaho.fi> Sat, 09 January 2010 12:23 UTC

Return-Path: <owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org>
X-Original-To: ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9B4893A67B2 for <ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 04:23:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.046
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.046 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 16UH1NcwlQ0H for <ietfarch-usefor-archive@core3.amsl.com>; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 04:23:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8EFC83A67B1 for <usefor-archive@ietf.org>; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 04:23:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o09CMHPj079294 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 9 Jan 2010 05:22:18 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id o09CMFKw079293; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 05:22:15 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: balder-227.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from flowerpot.kaijanaho.fi (flowerpot.kaijanaho.fi [80.68.88.155]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id o09CMCOP079286 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <ietf-usefor@imc.org>; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 05:22:14 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from antti-juhani@kaijanaho.fi)
Received: from kukkaseppele.kaijanaho.fi (a91-156-170-97.elisa-laajakaista.fi [91.156.170.97]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: ajk) by flowerpot.kaijanaho.fi (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5A8629000B for <ietf-usefor@imc.org>; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 14:22:10 +0200 (EET)
Received: by kukkaseppele.kaijanaho.fi (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B519C85408F; Sat, 9 Jan 2010 14:22:10 +0200 (EET)
Date: Sat, 09 Jan 2010 14:22:10 +0200
From: Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho <antti-juhani@kaijanaho.fi>
To: Usefor WG <ietf-usefor@imc.org>
Subject: Re: Parsing the Injection-Info: header field
Message-ID: <20100109122210.GC4413@kukkaseppele.kaijanaho.fi>
References: <3F6C660203CE4751A068B86CD382864E@Iulius> <20100109073118.GB4413@kukkaseppele.kaijanaho.fi> <7FDA90361E9E4C85A22D79FA9014E5C0@Iulius>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
In-Reply-To: <7FDA90361E9E4C85A22D79FA9014E5C0@Iulius>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
Sender: owner-ietf-usefor@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-usefor/mail-archive/>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-usefor-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
List-ID: <ietf-usefor.imc.org>

On Sat, Jan 09, 2010 at 11:22:45AM +0100, Julien ÉLIE wrote:
> Yet, RFC 5322 mentions in its introduction:
> 
>   This document specifies a syntax only for text messages.  In
>   particular, it makes no provision for the transmission of images,
>   audio, or other sorts of structured data in electronic mail messages.
>   There are several extensions published, such as the MIME document
>   series ([RFC2045], [RFC2046], [RFC2049]), which describe mechanisms
>   for the transmission of such data through electronic mail, either by
>   extending the syntax provided here or by structuring such messages to
>   conform to this syntax.  Those mechanisms are outside of the scope of
>   this specification.
> 
> I understand that RFC 2045 now extends the syntax of RFC 5322 (instead
> of RFC 822).

That interpretation would mean that suddenly CFWS beciame forbidden in MIME
constructs when RFC 2822 was published.  I don't think that was the intent,
especially when "those mechanisms are outside of the scope".

That paragraph is a bit unfortunately worded, though.

-- 
Antti-Juhani Kaijanaho, Jyväskylä, Finland
http://antti-juhani.kaijanaho.fi/newblog/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/antti-juhani/

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email