RE: identifying parts

["Eric Burger" <eburger@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

This issue was fully addressed by partial non-delivery notification (PNDN).
Would that be an appropriate approach?

The draft has expired.  If we want to discuss it, I can resubmit it as a fax
WG item.  However, I believe that would reset it to -00, which means I would
have to submit it today.

--
- Eric

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ietf-fax@xxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ietf-fax@xxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Dan Wing
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2001 12:11 PM
> To: IETF Internet Fax WG
> Cc: MAEDA toru
> Subject: identifying parts
[snip]
> I feel it is critical that any MDN or DSN response indicating a portion of
> a message was successfully or unsuccessfully processed must also indicate
> which MIME part is being described in the MDN or DSN reponse -- it is NOT
> as simple as the "page" having the problem, especially if Method 1 is used
> -- they are all page "1" from the view of the sender.  Method 1 is a valid
> message format and is allowed, so we must handle it correctly.
>
>
> I propose we require the use of Content-ID to identify MIME parts.  This
> identification allows the MDN to indicate which part(s) were successfully
> or unsuccessfully processed.
>
> Content-ID is described in RFC2045, section 7.  Its use is discussed in
> RFC2046.
>
> -Dan Wing