----- Original Message ----- From: "Dennis Sosnoski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, January 28, 2003 14:15 Subject: Re: Interoperative attachments
> Hmmm. So this means SOAP implementations that *don't* encode MIME > attachments work as long as the data being sent doesn't happen to > include the boundary pattern. In other words, they're broken? ;-) well, its more part of the mime spec that you have to make up a boundary that aint in the body. So you make up a long and fairly obscure pattern then scan through to look for it. Which does mean you need to stream through that 20MB file once to get the boundaries, then again to send it down the wire, but at least in scan two it will be off HDD and in cache, assuming you have an HDD and are not something like a Java cellphone. > Seriously, I don't see this as a big deal as long as it's spelled out to > the users of the implementation that they need to avoid this pattern in > attachments, if necessary encoding the data themselves. I assume it *is* > spelled out somewhere - I haven't tried using attachments yet, so I > haven't looked at this part of things. It is not the end users problem, any more than it is when you attach an image to an email message.
