cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1995-02-09 - Re: MIME based remailing commands

Header Data

From: “Perry E. Metzger” <perry@imsi.com>
To: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Message Hash: be04ed47caa6fa1050a0812544e33e34d57bd0fd88a586e8a46688ad0a7cd5c1
Message ID: <9502091458.AA11554@snark.imsi.com>
Reply To: <199502090425.UAA24521@largo.remailer.net>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-09 14:58:55 UTC
Raw Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 06:58:55 PST

Raw message

From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
Date: Thu, 9 Feb 95 06:58:55 PST
To: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Subject: Re: MIME based remailing commands
In-Reply-To: <199502090425.UAA24521@largo.remailer.net>
Message-ID: <9502091458.AA11554@snark.imsi.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



Eric Hughes says:
>    From: "Perry E. Metzger" <perry@imsi.com>
> 
>    xpat@vm1.spcs.umn.edu says:
>    > IMHO, an ideal message would have the ability to handle nested objects
>    > of varying types, MIME is only a start.
> 
>    What is it precisely that you might want to encapsulate that MIME
>    can't encapsulate?
> 
> Perry, you're missing the whole point, just like the exchange a few
> days about a remailer format standard.

If I am missing the whole point, it is because people are being
extremely vague about stating the point. This is engineering, not
social science. One specifies things precisely, as in "I think MIME
can't specify how to encapsulate a sound file", or "I think MIME
doesn't have the right headers defined to specify how long a mail
message is to be delayed". This fuzzy-engineering might feel good to
some of you but from my perspective it does nothing to enhance the
information content fo the discussion.

Perry

Thread