On Fri, 2006-10-27 at 10:43 -0400, Kevin A. McGrail wrote: > > > > Well, system administrators generally have a good reason for setting > > the maximum message size, and for RFC authors to attempt to subvert that > > is just plain wrong. > > Yes, but this was also written during the days of open relay and expected > multi-hop mail delivery. What the end-points enforced and what the > in-betweens decided were different.
And if anyone is old enough to remember when it was difficult for anyone but a university to get an internet connection and uunet dialups were the way the rest of us had to work, there were ftp<->email gateways that were very useful for obtaining the latest copy of gcc and the like, and this couldn't possibly have worked without splitting the delivery across many messages. Times may change, but protocols don't - that's the point of having them... -- Les Mikesell [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ NOTE: If there is a disclaimer or other legal boilerplate in the above message, it is NULL AND VOID. You may ignore it. Visit http://www.mimedefang.org and http://www.roaringpenguin.com MIMEDefang mailing list [email protected] http://lists.roaringpenguin.com/mailman/listinfo/mimedefang
