RE: IMAP vs. multipart/signed

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Previous message: Brad Knowles: "Re: RE: [ Death of MOSS? ]"

Bill Wohler said:
> Terry Gray <gray@CAC.Washington.EDU> writes:
> > The proposal I heard at the meeting was that the multipart/encrypted use
> > of content-type=application/octet-stream should be changed in favor of a
> > MIME type that would give the MUA a hint about which external processor
> > it should invoke to decrypt the object.
> 
>   On second thought, isn't this information already provided by the
>   multipart/encrypted protocol parameter?

Yes, but a non-multipart/encrypted-aware MUA will not understand that it 
should look at the protocol parameter to process the data.  It will probably 
treat the multipart/encrypted as multipart/mixed, in which case the typing 
information in the second part (i.e. application/foo) would be *very* 
helpful...

There was probably some discussion surrounding this in the security multiparts 
camp when it was decided that the second part should be 
application/octet-stream.  Ned?

Blake

• Previous message: Brad Knowles: "Re: RE: [ Death of MOSS? ]"