I wrote:
Consider a top-level message/rfc822, which contains a message/rfc822
part, which contains a multipart/mixed part, which contains a
text/plain part.
I just checked the public Cyrus test server at cyrus.andrew.cmu.edu
with such a message. (Well, the multipart part contained two
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Paul Jarc wrote:
Consider a top-level message/rfc822, which contains a message/rfc822
part, which contains a multipart/mixed part, which contains a
text/plain part.
I just checked the public Cyrus test server at cyrus.andrew.cmu.edu
with such a message. (Well, the
Mark Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Paul Jarc wrote:
That server agrees with what Mark says ([1.1.HEADER] is the header of
the multipart/mixed message), but it seems to disagree with the
example in RFC3501. In my test message:
[1] is an entire message/rfc822
You misrepresented the structure of the message; there is a layer of
encapsulation that you didn't mention. That's the cause of your
confusion.
The structure of that message is:
MESSAGE/RFC822 (message id [EMAIL PROTECTED])
1 MESSAGE/RFC822 (message id [EMAIL PROTECTED])
1.1 MESSAGE/RFC822
On Tue, 27 Jan 2004, Paul Jarc wrote:
Now if there is a text/plain message encapsulated in a message/rfc822
(single part) message, so that [1] is the same as [TEXT], then is
[1.MIME] the same as [HEADER]? Or is [x.MIME] only meaningful for
parts of a multipart message?
x.MIME is only
Mark Crispin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
x.MIME is only meaningful for parts of a multipart message and never
refers to HEADER part.
Ok. Cyrus seems to allow it, but I guess that won't hurt any correct
clients.
paul
Anti-virus software has detected a virus named W32/[EMAIL PROTECTED] (ED) in an
attachment
named message.zip you sent to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . The message was deleted without
being sent.
--
-
For information about this mailing
