[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Armor versus MIME versus binary

To: ietf-open-pgp@xxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Armor versus MIME versus binary
From: lutz@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Lutz Donnerhacke)
Date: 24 Oct 1997 13:41:56 GMT
Newsgroups: iks.lists.ietf-open-pgp
Organization: IKS GmbH Jena
References: <> <>
Sender: owner-ietf-open-pgp@xxxxxxx

* Lutz Donnerhacke wrote:
>But your comment is correct. I will move the 3.2 description to the
>beginning of 5 to support layering.

No, I'll not do this. There is a difference between "3.2 General framwork"
and "5. Packet Types". Sorry for the confusion.

References:
- Armor versus MIME versus binary
  - From: William Allen Simpson
- Re: Armor versus MIME versus binary
  - From: Lutz Donnerhacke

Prev by Date: Re: Armor versus MIME versus binary
Next by Date: Re: Armor versus MIME versus binary
Previous by thread: Re: Armor versus MIME versus binary
Next by thread: Re: Armor versus MIME versus binary
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread