Mark Crispin wrote:
On Mon, 15 Sep 2003, Ken Murchison wrote:
What is the meaning of BINARY[]?
I think that it should be a syntax error, but unfortunately the section-binary rule in RFC 3516 is: section-binary = "[" [section-part] "]" instead of: section-binary = "[" section-part "]"
I consider this to be a bug in RFC 3516. If it intended to make BINARY[] valid, it should have used the RFC 3501 "section" rule.
I agree. The semantics of what BINARY[] should do is definitely vague, and if its the same as BODY[], why bother?
Obviously, section-msgtext doesn't make much sense with BINARY, and I think the same applies to BINARY[].
-- Kenneth Murchison Oceana Matrix Ltd. Software Engineer 21 Princeton Place 716-662-8973 x26 Orchard Park, NY 14127 --PGP Public Key-- http://www.oceana.com/~ken/ksm.pgp
