mån 2012-04-16 klockan 12:34 -0300 skrev Marcus Kool:
> However, looking at the RFC where the example uses "asp, bat, exe, com, ole"
> it seems that the authors of the RFC were thinking of a URL-based "suffix",
> not content-type.
To me it indicates the set of people who worked on this part of the spec
thought more in files on a harddrive than URLs. Most likely AV scanning
people dealing with local file scanning. There you normally deal with
file extensions in this kind of processing conditions.
Regards
Henrik
Received on Mon Apr 16 2012 - 15:47:49 MDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Apr 18 2012 - 12:00:09 MDT