Re: [PATCH] sending minimal MIME headers
Salut Vincent,
On Tuesday, September 26, 2006 at 16:09:27 +0200, Vincent Lefèvre wrote:
> On 2006-09-24 19:08:20 +0200, Alain Bench wrote:
>> not generate "MIME-Version: 1.0" when there are no "Content-*:"
>> headers at all.
> The "MIME-Version: 1.0" header is still necessary when the message
> contains MIME-encoded headers.
Hum... RFC 2045 defining MV:1 says nothing about encoded headers;
While RFC 2047 doesn't seem to require sending it (says nothing), and
upon receiving states:
| 6.1. Recognition of 'encoded-word's in message headers
[...]
| (4) A MIME-Version header field is NOT required to be present for
| 'encoded-word's to be interpreted according to this specification. One
| reason for this is that the mail reader is not expected to parse the
| entire message header before displaying lines that may contain
| 'encoded-word's.
The need to send encoded-words with MV:1 is perhaps not explicitly
stated there (or I missed it), but seems implicit and quite logical: An
encoded-word is a MIME thing, and a MIME-conformant message must have an
MV:1. I think you are right, and will amend the patch: Thanks!
Bye! Alain.
--
Software should be written to deal with every conceivable error
RFC 1122 / Robustness Principle