rfc2231 implementations?

I can't remember ever seeing a 2231-encoded message in the wild. Are 
there implementations? Is there hope that a message using 2231 syntax 
will be understood by anyone?

Arnt

Re:rfc2231 implementations?

Arnt Gulbrandsen (07/18/2006 18:29):
>
>I can't remember ever seeing a 2231-encoded message in the wild. Are 
>there implementations? Is there hope that a message using 2231 syntax 
>will be understood by anyone?

I've never seen one in the wild.  Teamware's implementation will understand a conformant 2231
implementation, but will never attempt to create one.

Antony

Re: rfc2231 implementations?

Am Dienstag, 18. Juli 2006 17:29 schrieb Arnt Gulbrandsen:
> I can't remember ever seeing a 2231-encoded message in the wild. Are
> there implementations? Is there hope that a message using 2231 syntax
> will be understood by anyone?

Not sure what exactly you mean, but KMail does, of course, create 
2231-encoded headers for attachments with non-ASCII names. Though, much 
to my dismay, KMail also has a Microsoft-compatibility mode for 
creating those headers in Microsoft's RFC-violating format.

And that KMail understands messages using 2231 syntax should be obvious.

I guess the problem with 2231 is that Microsoft products will probably 
never create such messages because that would break backwards 
compatibility with their old products.

Regards,
Ingo

Re: rfc2231 implementations?

So far, we have two known writers (kmail and apple mail) and four known 
readers (eudora/mac, teamware, kmail, apple mail).

Ingo Klöcker writes:
> Am Dienstag, 18. Juli 2006 17:29 schrieb Arnt Gulbrandsen:
>>  I can't remember ever seeing a 2231-encoded message in the wild. Are 
>>  there implementations? Is there hope that a message using 2231 
>>  syntax will be understood by anyone?
>
> Not sure what exactly you mean, but KMail does, of course, create 
> 2231-encoded headers for attachments with non-ASCII names.

The question could be rephrased as: Can I assume that an attachment name 
encoded according to RFC 2231 will be correctly decoded by the 
recipient?

> Though, much to my dismay, KMail also has a Microsoft-compatibility 
> mode for creating those headers in Microsoft's RFC-violating format.

I suspect that means "no, you can't assume that".

Arnt

Re: rfc2231 implementations?

Am Mittwoch, 19. Juli 2006 10:38 schrieb Arnt Gulbrandsen:
> So far, we have two known writers (kmail and apple mail) and four
> known readers (eudora/mac, teamware, kmail, apple mail).

FWIW, Thunderbird (Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041207)) created the 
following non-RFC-2231 headers:
Content-Type: application/pdf;
 name="=?ISO-8859-1?Q?kr=FCzzbr=FCr=2Ewpd=2Epdf?="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="=?ISO-8859-1?Q?kr=FCzzbr=FCr=2Ewpd=2Epdf?="

So, at least by default Thunderbird doesn't create RFC 2231. But a quick 
test shows that Thunderbird seems to understand it. So knownReaders 
+= "Thunderbird".

> Ingo Klöcker writes:
> > Am Dienstag, 18. Juli 2006 17:29 schrieb Arnt Gulbrandsen:
> >>  I can't remember ever seeing a 2231-encoded message in the wild.
> >> Are there implementations? Is there hope that a message using 2231
> >> syntax will be understood by anyone?
> >
> > Not sure what exactly you mean, but KMail does, of course, create
> > 2231-encoded headers for attachments with non-ASCII names.
>
> The question could be rephrased as: Can I assume that an attachment
> name encoded according to RFC 2231 will be correctly decoded by the
> recipient?
>
> > Though, much to my dismay, KMail also has a Microsoft-compatibility

RE: rfc2231 implementations?

The next version of Microsoft Exchange has ability to decode 2231.

Regards,
Yuri

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-ietf-822 <at> mail.imc.org [mailto:owner-ietf-822 <at> mail.imc.org] On Behalf Of Ingo Klöcker
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 5:40 AM
To: ietf-822 <at> imc.org
Subject: Re: rfc2231 implementations?

Am Mittwoch, 19. Juli 2006 10:38 schrieb Arnt Gulbrandsen:
> So far, we have two known writers (kmail and apple mail) and four
> known readers (eudora/mac, teamware, kmail, apple mail).

FWIW, Thunderbird (Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (X11/20041207)) created the
following non-RFC-2231 headers:
Content-Type: application/pdf;
 name="=?ISO-8859-1?Q?kr=FCzzbr=FCr=2Ewpd=2Epdf?="
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="=?ISO-8859-1?Q?kr=FCzzbr=FCr=2Ewpd=2Epdf?="

So, at least by default Thunderbird doesn't create RFC 2231. But a quick
test shows that Thunderbird seems to understand it. So knownReaders
+= "Thunderbird".

> Ingo Klöcker writes:
> > Am Dienstag, 18. Juli 2006 17:29 schrieb Arnt Gulbrandsen:

Re: rfc2231 implementations?

Re: rfc2231 implementations?

On Tue July 18 2006 11:29, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
> 
> I can't remember ever seeing a 2231-encoded message in the wild. Are 
> there implementations?

Yes, http://users.erols.com/blilly/mparse/index.html
[An update is expected within a few weeks]

> Is there hope that a message using 2231 syntax  
> will be understood by anyone?

Of course.