cryptoanarchy.wiki

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

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

Header Data

From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: e71f4204f00676ea55b928fec1e988201945793f4774bb7e05aa44dafdf2d3bb
Message ID: <199502090425.UAA24521@largo.remailer.net>
Reply To: <9502082303.AA10796@snark.imsi.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-09 04:27:14 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 20:27:14 PST

Raw message

From: eric@remailer.net (Eric Hughes)
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 20:27:14 PST
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: MIME based remailing commands
In-Reply-To: <9502082303.AA10796@snark.imsi.com>
Message-ID: <199502090425.UAA24521@largo.remailer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


   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.

MIME is primarily a packaging standard.  MIME does not define the
innards, the payload, the contents.  MIME is only a start at what the
complete data format should look like.  You say MIME, and you've not
completely specified the data format, but rather constrained it in a
way that most everybody basically agrees with, including me.

Eric

Thread