idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-mixer-oda-00.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Cannot find the required boilerplate sections (Copyright, IPR, etc.) in this document. Expected boilerplate is as follows today (2024-04-26) according to https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info : IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.a: This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 2: Copyright (c) 2024 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the document authors. All rights reserved. IETF Trust Legal Provisions of 28-dec-2009, Section 6.b(i), paragraph 3: This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** Missing document type: Expected "INTERNET-DRAFT" in the upper left hand corner of the first page ** Missing expiration date. The document expiration date should appear on the first and last page. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about Internet-Drafts being working documents. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about 6 months document validity. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of current Internet-Drafts. ** The document seems to lack a 1id_guidelines paragraph about the list of Shadow Directories. == No 'Intended status' indicated for this document; assuming Proposed Standard Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** The document seems to lack an Abstract section. ** The document seems to lack an Introduction section. (A line matching the expected section header was found, but with an unexpected indentation: ' 1. Introduction' ) ** The document seems to lack a Security Considerations section. (A line matching the expected section header was found, but with an unexpected indentation: ' 2. Security considerations' ) ** The document seems to lack an IANA Considerations section. (See Section 2.2 of https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist for how to handle the case when there are no actions for IANA.) ** The document seems to lack an Authors' Addresses Section. ** There are 2 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == Line 51 has weird spacing: '...te that a bod...' == Line 52 has weird spacing: '...ontains infor...' == Line 53 has weird spacing: '... using the ...' == Line 54 has weird spacing: '.... For appli...' == Line 55 has weird spacing: '...e/value pair ...' == (2 more instances...) -- The document seems to lack a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, but may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. If you have contacted all the original authors and they are all willing to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust, then this is fine, and you can ignore this comment. If not, you may need to add the pre-RFC5378 disclaimer. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date () is 739384 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) -- Missing reference section? 'ODA' on line 53 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '0' on line 93 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? '1' on line 94 looks like a reference -- Missing reference section? 'MIME' on line 155 looks like a reference Summary: 13 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 7 warnings (==), 6 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 draft A MIME body part for ODA Nov 95 3 A MIME body part for ODA 5 Tue Nov 21 15:32:07 MET 1995 7 Harald Tveit Alvestrand 8 UNINETT 9 Harald.T.Alvestrand@uninett.no 11 Status of this Memo 13 This draft document is being circulated for comment. 15 Please send comments to the author, or to the MIXER list . 18 The following text is required by the Internet-draft rules: 20 This document is an Internet Draft. Internet Drafts are working 21 documents of the Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF), its 22 Areas, and its Working Groups. Note that other groups may also 23 distribute working documents as Internet Drafts. 25 Internet Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six 26 months. Internet Drafts may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by 27 other documents at any time. It is not appropriate to use 28 Internet Drafts as reference material or to cite them other than 29 as a "working draft" or "work in progress." 31 Please check the I-D abstract listing contained in each Internet 32 Draft directory to learn the current status of this or any other 33 Internet Draft. 35 The file name of this version is draft-ietf-mixer-oda-00.txt 37 draft A MIME body part for ODA Nov 95 39 1. Introduction 41 This document contains the definitions, originally contained in 42 RFC 1495 and RFC 1341, on how to carry ODA in MIME, and how to 43 translate it to its X.400 representation. 45 This document is an Experimental standard; if it turns out to be 46 useful and widely deployed, it can be moved onto the standards 47 track. 49 1.1. The Application/ODA MIME content-type 51 The "ODA" subtype of application is used to indicate that a body 52 contains information encoded according to the Office Document 53 Architecture [ODA] standards, using the ODIF representation 54 format. For application/oda, the Content- Type line should also 55 specify an attribute/value pair that indicates the document 56 application profile (DAP), using the key word "profile", and the 57 document class, using the keyword "class". 59 For the keyword "class", the values "formatted", "processable" and 60 "formatted-processable" are legal values. 62 Thus an appropriate header field might look like this: 64 Content-Type: application/oda; profile=Q112; class=formatted 66 Consult the ODA standard [T.411] for further information. 68 The Base64 content-transfer-encoding is appropriate for carrying 69 ODA. 71 1.2. ODA - application/oda 73 X.400 Body Part: ODA 74 MIME Content-Type: application/oda 75 Conversion: None 76 Comments: 78 The ODA body part is defined in the CCITT document T.411 [T.411], 79 appendix E, section E.2, "ODA identification in the P2 protocol of 81 draft A MIME body part for ODA Nov 95 83 MHS" 85 An abbreviated version of its ASN.1 definition is: 87 oda-body-part EXTENDED-BODY-PART-TYPE 88 PARAMETERS OdaBodyPartParameters 89 DATA OdaData 90 ::= id-et-oda 92 OdaBodyPartParameters ::= SET { 93 document-application-profile [0] OBJECT IDENTIFIER 94 document-architecture-class [1] INTEGER { 95 formatted (0) 96 processable (1) 97 formatted-processable(2)}} 99 id-et-oda OBJECT IDENTIFIER ::= { 2 8 1 0 1 } 101 Mapping from X.400 to MIME, the following is done: 103 The Parameters.document-application-profile is mapped onto the 104 MIME parameter "profile" according to the table below. 106 Profile OBJECT IDENTIFIER 108 Q112 { iso (1) identified-organization (3) ewos (16) 109 eg (2) oda (6) profile (0) q112 (1) } 111 The Parameters.document-architecture-class is mapped onto the MIME 112 parameter "class" according to the table below 114 String Integer 116 formatted formatted(0) 117 processable processable(1) 118 formatted-processable formatted-processable(2) 120 NOTE: This parameter is not defined in RFC 1341. 122 The body of the MIME content-type is the Data part of the ODA body 123 part. 125 When mapping from MIME to X.400, the following steps are done: 127 draft A MIME body part for ODA Nov 95 129 The Parameters.document-application-profile and 130 Parameters.document-architecture-class are set from the tables 131 above. If any of the parameters are missing, the values for Q112 132 and formatted-processable are used. 134 It is an option for the gateway implementor to try to access them 135 from inside the document, where they are defined as 137 document-profile.document-characteristics.document-architecture-class 139 document-profile.document-characteristics.document-application-profile 141 Gateways are NOT required to do this, since the document- 142 characteristics are optional parameters. If a gateway does not, 143 it simply uses the defaulting rules defined above. 145 The OBJECT IDENTIFIERs for the document application profile and 146 for ODA {2 8 0 0} must be added to the Encoded Information Types 147 parameter of the message envelope. 149 2. Security considerations 151 Security issues are not consiered in this memo. 153 3. REFERENCES 155 [MIME] 156 RFC 1521: N. Borenstein, N. Freed, "MIME (Multipurpose 157 Internet Mail Extensions) Part One: Mechanisms for 158 Specifying and Describing the Format of Internet Message 159 Bodies", 09/23/1993 161 [T.411] 162 CCITT Recommendation T.411 (1988), Open Document Architecture 163 (ODA) and Interchange Format, Introduction and General 164 Principles 166 draft A MIME body part for ODA Nov 95