It appears that Bill Cole via mailop <mailop-20160...@billmail.scconsult.com> said: >On 2023-05-12 at 09:40:14 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 May 2023 13:40:14 +0000) >Paul Gregg via mailop <pgregg+mai...@pgregg.com> >is rumored to have said: > >> I suspect with verp/bounce addressing widely in use now, 64 octets >> just isn't enough these days. > >Hogwash. 64 mail-safe octets is adequate for every domain to give a >unique printable(!) deliverable local-part to every elementary particle >in the universe. It's a namespace adequate for ANYTHING
If only. You run out of octets pretty quickly when you are doing hacks like the IETF's anti-DMARC workaround which turns mailop-20160...@billmail.scconsult.com into mailop-20160228=40billmail.scconsult....@dmarc.ietf.org I also know people who do much fancier versions of timestamped addresses like the ones you use. Yeah, if you're a good enough programmer you can compress it and base36 encode or you can do what I do and put the magic into the domain, e.g. mailop-20160...@billmail.scconsult.com.dmarc.fail, it but again, if only. On the one hand, I don't think people get to complain if their overlong addresses can't be delivered, but I also think that in the common case that it's easy to handle longer addresses, you should do so. R's, John _______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
