IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Emailcore] Ticket #14: G.7.8. Review different size limits

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Thu, 15 July 2021 01:12 UTC

Return-Path: <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
X-Original-To: emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 80EC33A0593 for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 18:12:48 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.1
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=mrochek.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id et0geQ0uEmdF for <emailcore@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 18:12:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [98.153.82.211]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 31D533A1385 for <emailcore@ietf.org>; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 18:12:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01S1EGVWS5E800DLXG@mauve.mrochek.com> for emailcore@ietf.org; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 18:07:39 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mrochek.com; s=201712; t=1626311258; bh=xyc92HOs2fOyKJp6EZgeYt8ciLwKBUeo8V92qVnjoog=; h=Cc:Date:From:Subject:In-reply-to:References:To:From; b=kSREWsO3nUE5JdR/8Ol9hHCj/eUEHPjU35Lk6jPn8wJKVycap0o45BXRkAEB6EaKR CRsVh6uMDSgXuZME0H+uzGela24zrpU/OtclFn+qkBhYzQOM92zo0XHRJv9jaRqu9W ddfmTECjRgWVozJibM/nNFNupTwB+Ecq6ibZEEDM=
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01S0F3SXH38G005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com>; Wed, 14 Jul 2021 18:07:37 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, emailcore@ietf.org, Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
Message-id: <01S1EGVVJ7BW005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Jul 2021 18:04:07 -0700
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Wed, 14 Jul 2021 14:38:16 -0400" <CAHej_8kg6S-kPakUrXBx_4OdD+2NhG5hcpBFt73eSPTfSPYFoQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <70e3923f-c3c9-8625-4009-0a4ca0fb5ab0@dcrocker.net> <20210713194736.A65FB214C287@ary.qy> <CAHej_8kg6S-kPakUrXBx_4OdD+2NhG5hcpBFt73eSPTfSPYFoQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Todd Herr <todd.herr=40valimail.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/emailcore/lst0wNfvlwyk0BpkdTIrYq2X_pk>
Subject: Re: [Emailcore] Ticket #14: G.7.8. Review different size limits
X-BeenThere: emailcore@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: EMAILCORE proposed working group list <emailcore.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/emailcore>, <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/emailcore/>
List-Post: <mailto:emailcore@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/emailcore>, <mailto:emailcore-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2021 01:12:49 -0000

> On Tue, Jul 13, 2021 at 3:47 PM John Levine <johnl@taugh.com> wrote:


> > Speaking of limits, how do we feel about the 1000 octet limit on line
> > length.  It is my impression
> > that it is often exceeded in HTML text.

> Haven't had occasion to see the issue crop up in a while, but I don't miss
> having to explain to a content creator that the limit exists, and that left
> angle bracket b r right angle bracket is not the same as carriage return,
> line feed.

Purely anecdotal, but I've noticed that in the past couple of years quite
a few HTML senders seem to have newly discovered something called
quoted-printable.

In any case, I don't see how we can possibly increase the 998+CRLF limit at
this point. There are far too many SMTP implementations with fixed buffer sizes
that are never going to be updated and will be in use for a long, long time.
Nor, frankly, do I see any advantage in doing so given the existence of
encoding options like quoted-printable.

				Ned

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email