Subject: [Simple] MSRP: Content-Type position

From: Ben Campbell <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 16:42:15 -0500

The base spec says Content-Type must be the last header. Hisham asked 
if we can put in some text to justify that. I am having trouble 
thinking of a good reason.

So, can we remove that assertion completely? If not, can someone 
justify it?

Thanks!

Ben.

_______________________________________________
Simple mailing list
[email-masked]
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/simple

---

From: Rohan Mahy <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 15:07:36 -0700

I'll provide some motivational text.

thx,
-r

---

From: Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 2004 18:30:30 -0400

>> So, can we remove that assertion completely? If not, can someone 

What is the goal here? To have the message parser stop parsing when it 
gets to a mime header, so you can switch to using a separate mime header 
parser there?

If so, maybe we should allow for other mime headers as well.
Maybe it would be better to have some more overt delimiter that says 
everything following is mime.

In the case of SIP, my conceptual model is that the entire sip message 
is a mime entity, consisting of mime headers and extension headers (from 
  mime point of view). Then the order doesn't matter. But to take 
advantage of that model you need a sip parser and a mime parser that 
share a representation. It would be simpler if the two parsers could be 
independent.

	Paul

---

From: Pekka Pessi <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 17 Aug 2004 17:04:54 +0300

Paul Kyzivat <[email-masked]> writes:
>>> The base spec says Content-Type must be the last header. Hisham asked if
>>> we can put in some text to justify that. I am having trouble thinking of
>>> a good reason.

>>> So, can we remove that assertion completely? If not, can someone justify
>>> it?

>What is the goal here? 

I think the syntax makes sure that there is a Content-Type header
if and only if there is some actual content.

>To have the message parser stop parsing when it gets
>to a mime header, so you can switch to using a separate mime header parser
>there?

Currently, the other MIME headers are before Content-Type:

   content-stuff = *(Other-Mime-Header CRLF)
                   Content-Type 2CRLF data CRLF

If we would like to switch to MIME header parser, we should have

   content-stuff = Content-Type CRLF 
		   *(Other-Mime-Header CRLF)
                   CRLF 
		   data 
                   CRLF

--Pekka