1995-02-08 - Re: MIME based remailing commands

Header Data

From: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>
To: Hal <perry@imsi.com
Message Hash: fce4d998d83625f0a224e5792902a9f561e2ebdebb7e9bdab233ca52fbcc55cd
Message ID: <ojCAH3b0Eyt5QxSaNd@nsb.fv.com>
Reply To: <23676.792177411.1@nsb.fv.com>
UTC Datetime: 1995-02-08 17:20:11 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 09:20:11 PST

Raw message

From: Nathaniel Borenstein <nsb@nsb.fv.com>
Date: Wed, 8 Feb 95 09:20:11 PST
To: Hal <perry@imsi.com
Subject: Re: MIME based remailing commands
In-Reply-To: <23676.792177411.1@nsb.fv.com>
Message-ID: <ojCAH3b0Eyt5QxSaNd@nsb.fv.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Excerpts from junk.interesting: 7-Feb-95 Re: MIME based remailing co..
"Perry E. Metzger"@imsi. (2553)

> > > It is being remailed via a MIME-based structure where two new content types
> > > are defined: multipart/remail and application/remail-commands.  The
> > > multipart/remail type is supposed to be composed of two parts, the
> > > application/remail-commands part which has remailer commands, and the
> > > other part which is the "payload" to be remailed.

Perhaps you might consider writing up an informational RFC to define
these types?  I think that would be very useful. -- Nathaniel





Thread