6 Feb
2000
6 Feb
'00
6:44 a.m.
On Sat, Feb 05, 2000 at 05:28:38PM -0000, Peter Pachla (peter.pachla(a)wintermute.org.uk)
wrote:
Hi Eric,
Personally I'd go for option "b", it would be the easiest and most
courteous
method. Whilst desirable, I feel option "c" would be too problematical.
If we do end up bouncing MIME'd messages, please don't block PGP/MIME
signatures. (That is, please don't block messages of type
multipart/signed, with part types of text/plain and
application/pgp-signature.) We might also not want to block multipart
messages that consist of only text/plain or message/rfc822, which are
probably people forwarding other people's mail (read: forwarding other
people's offers of computers) from a MIME-aware mail agent.
-Rich
--
------------------------------ Rich Lafferty ---------------------------
Sysadmin/Programmer, Instructional and Information Technology Services
Concordia University, Montreal, QC (514) 848-7625
------------------------- rich(a)alcor.concordia.ca ----------------------
Options I
can think of:
a) silently discard any such postings (probably not a good idea)
b) bounce them back to the author, with an explanation of why bounced
c) remove the non-text part
d) combination of (b) and (c)
e) accept, but warn the author (who may not realise (s)he's sent HTML)
For options a and b, only the header needs to be examined....