On 28Jan2014 09:11, Matthias Apitz <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm sending mails with the following header lines: > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit [...] > But, sometimes I'm forced to use as next MX a Microsoft Exchange: > $ telnet 10.1.70.200 25 > Trying 10.1.70.200... > Connected to 10.1.70.200. > 220 Exchange.BKR.local Microsoft ESMTP MAIL Service, Version: 6.0.3790.4675 > ready at Fri, 24 Jan 2014 11:47:57 +0100 > > and this piece of software (or malware) is complaining about the > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit line, saying: > > <Exchange.BKR.local #5.6.1 smtp;554 5.6.1 Body type not supported by > Remote Host> > > I've checked the RFC 1428 for this which gives the above lines even as > an example (only with charset ISO-8859-1 and not UTF-8). And some googling > gave me a link to the M$ pages, which claim > > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms526992(v=exchg.10).aspx > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > Exchange Server 2003 > > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit > > 8bit encoding has the same line-length limitations as the 7bit encoding. > It allows 8bit > characters. No encoding or decoding is required for 8bit files. Since not > all MTAs > can handle 8bit data, the 8bit encoding is not a valid encoding mechanism > for Internet mail.
[... goes and looks ...] Indeed, that's all their page says. Twits. I'd get your MUA (mutt) to use 7bit encoding. It certainly used to be the case that there were no guarrentees that 8-bit data would go through undamaged. Since it appears that Exchange Server 2003 is such an 8-bit damaging MTA (I'd call rejection "damage", wouldn't you?) Be conservative; send in a safer encoding; 7-bit with quoted-printable. Cheers, -- Cameron Simpson <[email protected]> Microsoft Mail: as far from RFC-822 as you can get and still pretend to care. - Abby Franquemont-Guillory <[email protected]>
