Timothy,
I think you are correct. I will cross-reference the MDN and make sure of it.
Thanks!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tchu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [SMTP:tchu@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 1998 10:17 PM
> To: chuck.shih@xxxxxxxxxxx; ietf-ediint@xxxxxxx
> Cc: mjansson@xxxxxxxxxxx; drummond@xxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: AS#1-08: Syntax of "Disposition-notification-options" and
> "*-field"
>
> Hello Chuck,
>
> During the development of an EDIINT application, we have
> enjoyed many favours from AS1. Thank you.
> But I came across some problems in the AS#1-08 this time.
> Is it my misunderstanding or only a typo?
>
> 1) Syntax of "Disposition-notification-options"
> The lines preceded with ">" is quoted from original document.
>
> In [draft-ietf-ediint-as1-04]
> >5.2 Requesting a signed receipt
> >... (21 lines omitted)
> >where
> > disposition-notification-parameters = parameter *(";" parameter)
> >where
> > parameter = attribute "=" importance ", " 1#value "
> >where
> > importance = "required" | "optional "
> >
> >So the the Disposition-notification-options string could be either
> > optional, signed-receipt-protocol, <protocol symbol>;
> > optional, signed-receipt-micalg, <micalg1>, <micalg2>,...;
>
> whereas, in [RFC2298]
> >2.2 The Disposition-Notification-Options Header
> >... (13 lines omitted)
> > parameter = attribute "=" importance "," 1#value
>
>
> ^(a
> <"> has been added here by as1)
> According to my understanding to RFC2298,
> the last 3 lines above quoted from as1 should be:
> >So the the Disposition-notification-options string could be either
> > signed-receipt-protocol=optional, <protocol symbol>;
> > signed-receipt-micalg=optional, <micalg1>, <micalg2>,...;
> isn't it?
>
> 2) "*-field"s( failure-field, error-field, and warning-field)
>
> In [RFC2298]-Page9
> > disposition-notification-content = [ reporting-ua-field CRLF ]
> > [ mdn-gateway-field CRLF ]
> > [ original-recipient-field CRLF ]
> > final-recipient-field CRLF
> > [ original-message-id-field CRLF ]
> > disposition-field CRLF
> > *( failure-field CRLF )
> > *( error-field CRLF )
> > *( warning-field CRLF )
> > *( extension-field CRLF )
>
> whereas in [draft-ietf-ediint-as1-04]-5.3.2, three examples of
> the "Disposition" header has been listed:
> > Disposition: "disposition-mode"; failed, Failure: unsupported format
> > Disposition: "disposition-mode"; processed/Error: decryption-failed
> > Disposition: "disposition-mode"; processed/Warning:
> > authentication-failed, processing continued
>
> I think it should be:
> > Disposition: "disposition-mode";failed CRLF
> > Failure: unsupported format CRLF
> > Disposition: "disposition-mode"; processed/error
> > Error: decryption-failed
> > Disposition: "disposition-mode"; processed/warning
> > Warning: authentication-failed, processing continued
>
>
> Regards,
> Timothy