RE: Activation points and callout modes

I want to be able to consider it as an extened header.
jfc

Interesting: 
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-vpim-routing-08.txt under 
last call. I do not think there is any future with ENUM but I may be wrong 
and they have funding.


On 09:16 03/02/2005, Martin Stecher said:

> >
> > At 17:33 02/02/2005, Martin Stecher wrote:
> > > > I don't see how D (email body modification) "falls back"
> > to A (command
> > > > modification), but as long as it can be done, I don't
> > care what letter
> > > > gets assigned to it.
> > >
> > >On Jan 20 you replied to an earlier message saying:
> > >   > Yes, I think that operating on the DATA portion fits into the
> > >   > architecture without the need for special consideration.
> > >
> > >That is what I wanted to describe here again. The email
> > message body is
> > >the data coming after the DATA command. It can be seen also
> > as command
> > >modification. No special consideration necessary -> D "falls
> > back" to A.
> >
> > This is true with unstructured text. But not with structured
> > text messages
> > (XML, ASN.1, proprietary formats, signals, etc.).
> >
>
>I don't understand what the content type of the message body has
>to do with this. Please explain.