Date: Sun, 10 Jan 93 14:55:40 EST
From: Mark Riordan <mrr(_at_)scss3(_dot_)cl(_dot_)msu(_dot_)edu>
To: pem-dev(_at_)TIS(_dot_)com
Subject: Binary or Compressed PEM files
...
The principal question is how we should indicate the type of
file in the PEM headers.
Our current thinking is to implement a PEM header like:
But you are using MIME notation here so you should follow MIME
rules. Especially since that will make interoperating much easier..
Content-Type: Type[/Subtype][,Modifier[/Submodifier]]*
This sort of thing was discussed in the MIME WG at length and the decision
was made to only do type/subtype. Anything extra to specify are done
with options in option="value" format.
Examples:
Content-Type: Binary
Content-Type: Binary,Compressed/compress
or some such.
...
Our goal is to stay as PEM-compliant and MIME-compliant
as possible without taking on the task of implementing
full MIME. (Implementing full PEM is an eventual goal,
but we're making no commitments.)
Your example is *NOT* MIME-Compliant in the slightest. The MIME
equivalent in MIME is:
Content-Type: application/octet-stream; conversions="x-compress"
We don't want to go off and do something unique and
non-interoperable, but we do want to implement something
in the not-too-distant future.
Yes, please *don't*. The momentum behind MIME is building rapidly
and you don't wanna get run over.
<- David Herron <david(_at_)twg(_dot_)com> (work)
<david(_at_)davids(_dot_)mmdf(_dot_)com> (home)
<-
<- "That's our advantage at Microsoft; we set the standards and we can change
them."
<- Karen Hargrove of Microsoft quoted in the Feb 1993 Unix Review editorial.