Re: Content-Length was Test Indicator Issue

[Michael Joya <mike.joya@xmlglobal.com>]

> It was my understanding from the discussions in Tokyo
> that most POC teams were ignoring Content-Length and that
> most MIME parsers do so as well (because it is NOT a MIME
> header afterall!). Please give me a compelling reason to leave 
> it in besides generalities that it might come in handy.
 
    Aside from optimization, it is very important to have peer-to-peer 
agreement on length for the signing and encryption of invididual mime 
parts. Boundary matching implementations can differ in agreement on 
length, due to handling of leading or trailing whitespace, inclusion of 
headers, et cetera.

    I guess what I am wondering is, if its removal was unanimous then 
there must have been some overwhelming benefit to its absence. What was 
this benefit?


-- 
// mike.joya@xmlglobal.com
// XML Global
// POC Working Group - ebXML
// Vancouver, Canada
// 604.717.1100 x230