< I have a vendor claiming that this is illegal because the "outer" appears
< in the boundary "outer-inner", and thus violates the need for the
< boundaries to be unique. Their claim is in fact that "outer" must appear
< NOWHERE in the body--not merely that "--outer<CRLF>" must not appear in
< the body.
< I think this is absolutely preposterous. I think that the uniqueness
< requirement means that the string "--outer<CRLF>" must not appear as body
< contents, but that "--outer-inner<CRLF>" is perfectly OK (so far as the
< outer multipart goes), and that the fragment above is therefore perfectly
< What say you all? Have I misread the RFC? Has the other vendor? Does
< the RFC need to be clarified?
My interpretation is the same as yours.