On Sat, 29 Jun 1991 17:43:11 -0400 (EDT), John C Klensin wrote:
Against that background, I don't see where the "show stopper" language
is coming from. If you don't want messages either converted or bounced,
and don't want to define and enforce an 8 bit enclave, then don't use 7
bit transport.
I assume you mean "don't use 8 bit transport"?
What I consider a "show stopper" is anything that makes RFC-XXXX impractical
to implement, especially if the sole perceived value of that thing is to make
things easier for RFC-YYYY people.
What set this off was the question as to whether or not MULTIPART or MESSAGE
types may have a transfer-encoding. I believe that they MUST NOT. The
justification offered was that it makes 8/7 gateways easier to apply a
transfer-encoding on a top level rather than at the lowest level. That does
not, to my mind, provide an excuse for the great burden that upper-level
transfer encodings would have on all UA's.
If this makes 8/7 gateways impossible, I don't care. If the impossibility of
8/7 gateways makes working 8-bit MTAs impossible, so much the better.