From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/19900 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Steinar Bang Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: Mime-Version and no Content-Type Date: 16 Dec 1998 17:30:48 +0100 Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035158165 13955 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 23:56:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 23:56:05 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: Original-Received: from karazm.math.uh.edu (karazm.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.1]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA23559 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:31:40 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5]) by karazm.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAB25288; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:31:24 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:31:26 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA04172 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 10:31:12 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: from viffer.oslo.metis.no (viffer.oslo.metis.no [195.0.254.249]) by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA23532 for ; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 11:31:02 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: (from sb@localhost) by viffer.oslo.metis.no (8.8.7/8.8.7) id RAA24747; Wed, 16 Dec 1998 17:30:48 +0100 Original-To: ding@gnus.org In-Reply-To: Karl Kleinpaste's message of "16 Dec 1998 09:04:43 -0500" User-Agent: Gnus/5.070065 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.65) XEmacs/20.4 (Emerald) Precedence: list X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7 Original-Lines: 13 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:19900 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:19900 >>>>> Karl Kleinpaste : > Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: >> ...should have neither of these headers actually included, since >> they are the default values and carry no information. (But I'm >> unable to see where RFC2045 says this right now -- did I imagine it?) > Not exactly. I don't recall it in 2045 specifically, but it is > definitely present elsewhere, e.g., in Spencer's son-of-1036. I most violently disagree with son-of-1036 in this respect, and think the CT and CTE headers should always be present.