Subject: Re: Attachment Stripped in Transaction

From: [email-masked] (Sean Doran)
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 01:32:10 +0200 (CEST)

vjs writes:

|   1. reach consensus that some binary formats should be filtered,

s/some/all/

How hard is it to add a URL instead of a MIME attachment?
I wonder how that fits in with the first two letters of IETF's acronym...

I think vjs's point is a good one to take up at the IESG plenary session
in London next week.

	Sean.

---

From: Lloyd Wood <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2001 12:20:26 +0100 (BST)

> How hard is it to add a URL instead of a MIME attachment?

mimetype text/url

I see a Great Need.

Of course, you'd get that as an attachment along with a copy of the
page at said url in case your mail agent understands text/html but not
text/url...

L.

<[email-masked]>PGP<http://www.ee.surrey.ac.uk/Personal/L.Wood/>

---

From: Keith Moore <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 13:41:02 -0400

> I see a Great Need.

it's already defined:  message/external-body; access-type=url

see RFC 2017.