<< Since RFC 1521 discourages the use of the old "NAME" parameter, my
<< question is this: when trying to communicate file name information
<< between old and new MIME mailers, is it recommended to upgrade the older
<< application to employ the "experimental" RFC 1806 or to "downgrade" the
<< new application to RFC 1341? Has RFC 1806 achieved widespread popularity
<< among MIME mailers?
< It gets worse. some mailers use 'Content-Description' for the filename.
I haven't seen this, thankfully.
< By and large, 1806 is in use. Best thing to do is use both methods, and
< prefer C-D on reciept.
This is the only workable solution we've come up with.
Tony Hansen
hansen(_at_)pegasus(_dot_)att(_dot_)com,
tony(_at_)attmail(_dot_)com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/Tony_Hansen