From: Rick Busdiecker <rfb@lehman.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Feb 95 12:20:29 PST
To: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
Subject: Re: MIME based remailing commands
In-Reply-To: <199502082037.MAA02640@jobe.shell.portal.com>
Message-ID: <9502102017.AA11002@cfdevx1.lehman.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


    Date: Wed, 8 Feb 1995 12:37:54 -0800
    From: Hal <hfinney@shell.portal.com>
    
    Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com> writes:

    Right now we are basically having the remailing commands be mail
    header fields.  But really people aren't supposed to just make up
    new fields like that.  I think the "name space" of these fields is
    protected somewhat more than many other aspects of communication
    protocols on the net.

If you start your header name with X-, then you are conforming that
gross, ugly atrocity that is MIME.  And yet, by using headers rather
than TGUATIM, you help to preserve sanity and avoid that vast majority
of MIME slime.

Note that I'm not suggesting that MIME has no place.  When you truly
need to mix data types and you *want* the different parts to be easily
processed by all, it makes perfect sense.

Given the privacy goals of a remailing, MIME has only disadvantages.

    Is there precedent for adding service-by-mail functionality in
    this way?  I am not completely comfortable with it.  And as we
    think of new functionality and new commands they all have to get
    added at this top level, the same visibility and name space as
    "Subject", "From", and "To".

So, do what you have to in C and C++-sans-namespaces, use a prefix.
X-RM- could prefix the Remailer namespace.  It's ugly, but compared to
the alternative it is pure beauty.
    
--
Rick Busdiecker <rfb@lehman.com>      Please do not send electronic junk mail!
  Lehman Brothers Inc.
  3 World Financial Center  "The more laws and order are made prominent, the
  New York, NY  10285-1100   more thieves and robbers there will be." --Lao Tzu