Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 14, 2023. It is now read-only.

Implement nested boundaries #56

Closed
abonander opened this issue Dec 17, 2016 · 1 comment
Closed

Implement nested boundaries #56

abonander opened this issue Dec 17, 2016 · 1 comment

Comments

@abonander
Copy link
Owner

This is a feature I've been putting off for a while because I wasn't sure how to approach it. Still not quite sure, but I needed a reminder somewhere so I don't forget it.

@abonander
Copy link
Owner Author

abonander commented Feb 22, 2017

Closing as I decided to leave this unimplemented. The complexity it adds doesn't appear to be worth it.

IETF RFC 7578, Appendix A claims:

the method of using a nested "multipart/mixed" from [RFC2388] is no longer recommended for creators and is not required for receivers as there are no known implementations of senders.

(Emphasis mine.)

Prototype implementation is archived on the nested-archive branch for posterity. As of 0.10.0 if a field has Content-Type: multipart/mixed an error will be thrown (now just a note is logged) linking back to this issue.

If anyone comes across any clients that are sending such requests, please feel free to share the details here.

Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant