Re: 2822upd-04 body content restrictions

On 1/27/08 at 4:54 PM -0500, Bruce Lilly wrote:

>RFC 822 has been amended by RFC 1123 and RFC 2047 among others, and 
>both of those have published errata.  I'm sure that you're well 
>aware of this, as 2822 incorporated many of those widely-scattered 
>amendments to 822.

2822 never incorporated anything from MIME, and that was by charter 
of the working group that wrote it.

>My concern is that (ignoring for the moment the conflict between 
>what 1.2.3 says that section 2 describes and what the actual section 
>2 text states)

What conflict is that?

>a parser using the full 2822 parse grammer will not be able to parse 
>1994-era and modern messages.

You bet. One had better read and understand the MIME specs before 
implementing a parser for messages with characters in the range 
128-255 (leaving aside that you also better understand what those 
octets mean and which ones are actually legal depending on the 
charset of the message; many of them are not legal in certain 
charsets, and many have different meanings depending on the charset). 
2822[upd] is a baseline, not the entire story.

>2822 and the draft under discussion are supposed to update 822 in 
>accordance with changes to Internet mail since 822's publication.

No, that is false. 2822 was written under a specific charter, and 
2822upd is an attempt to fix actual errors in 2822. If you want to 
have a document that updates [2]822 in accordance with changes to 
Internet mail to date, either go to the IESG and charter a new 
working group, or write the document yourself.

pr
-- 
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
Qualcomm Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102