Re: compressed content-transfer-encoding?

> Even though application/zip is lame, other mechanisms might be
> worse. Maybe we should look harder at providing what would be
> necessary to make 'application/zip' actually work, e.g., some
> top-level indication of what's actually in the package?
this has the same deployment barrier as adding a new 
content-transfer-encoding - in either case the mime mail
reader needs to know what to do with the extra parameter
or the new c-t-e.