Dňa 15. mája 2023 17:09:17 UTC používateľ Brandon Long via mailop
napísal:
>The full namespace is also not available, our experience was that relying
>on case in that portion of the
>address was problematic, as there were many systems who would lowercase the
>address before using it.
While my
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 12:44 PM John Levine via mailop
wrote:
> 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 +)
> >Paul Gregg via mailop
> >is rumored to have said:
> >
> >> I suspect
ind of bad behavior.
/ Tobias
-Original Message-
From: mailop On Behalf Of Slavko via mailop
Sent: Monday, May 15, 2023 2:39 PM
To: mailop
Subject: Re: [mailop] Thoughts on envelope address local-part length limits
Dňa 15. mája 2023 7:44:07 UTC používateľ Tobias Herkula via
> On 14 May 2023, at 18:03, Paul Gregg via mailop wrote:
>
> On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 05:54:28PM +, Slavko via mailop wrote:
>> Dňa 12. mája 2023 13:40:14 UTC používateľ Paul Gregg via mailop
>> napísal:
>>
>>> 4.5.3.1. Size Limits and Minimums
>>
>> When you read RFC, you MUST read
Dňa 15. mája 2023 7:44:07 UTC používateľ Tobias Herkula via mailop
napísal:
>Be careful with references to Postels robustness principle and look into that
>https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-iab-protocol-maintenance (formally
>known as "postel-was-wrong")
>And if you reference
12, 2023 7:54 PM
To: mailop
Subject: Re: [mailop] Thoughts on envelope address local-part length limits
Dňa 12. mája 2023 13:40:14 UTC používateľ Paul Gregg via mailop
napísal:
>4.5.3.1. Size Limits and Minimums
When you read RFC, you MUST read all, not only interesting parts.
Yes, s
It appears that Paul Gregg via mailop said:
>My original question was if the 64 octet limit is pointless now.
>Seems like it is.
No, not quite. One time I asked Ned Freed why the Oracle MTA he
supported, which is widely used in corporate systems, enforced those
limits. He told me that it was
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 05:54:28PM +, Slavko via mailop wrote:
> Dňa 12. mája 2023 13:40:14 UTC používateľ Paul Gregg via mailop
> napísal:
>
> >4.5.3.1. Size Limits and Minimums
>
> When you read RFC, you MUST read all, not only interesting parts.
> Yes, sometime it is hard, but
On 2023-05-12 at 16:52:38 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 May 2023 13:52:38 -0700)
Brandon Long via mailop
is rumored to have said:
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 8:54 AM Bill Cole via mailop
wrote:
On 2023-05-12 at 09:40:14 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 May 2023 13:40:14 +)
Paul Gregg via mailop
is rumored to have
On Fri, May 12, 2023 at 8:54 AM Bill Cole via mailop
wrote:
> On 2023-05-12 at 09:40:14 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 May 2023 13:40:14 +)
> Paul Gregg via mailop
> is rumored to have said:
>
> > I suspect with verp/bounce addressing widely in use now, 64 octets
> > just
> > isn't enough these days.
>
It appears that Bill Cole via mailop
said:
>On 2023-05-12 at 09:40:14 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 May 2023 13:40:14 +)
>Paul Gregg via mailop
>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
Dňa 12. mája 2023 13:40:14 UTC používateľ Paul Gregg via mailop
napísal:
>4.5.3.1. Size Limits and Minimums
When you read RFC, you MUST read all, not only interesting parts.
Yes, sometime it is hard, but notice the sentence in this section:
Every implementation MUST be able to receive
> On 12 May 2023, at 14:40, Paul Gregg via mailop wrote:
>
> I'd like to start a discussion on folks opinions(*) on enforcing
> Envelope Sender/Recipient local-part length limits.
>
> *opinions - because no mail operator seems to agree what it should be.
>
> For context, RFC5321 defines
On 2023-05-12 at 09:40:14 UTC-0400 (Fri, 12 May 2023 13:40:14 +)
Paul Gregg via mailop
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
I'd like to start a discussion on folks opinions(*) on enforcing
Envelope Sender/Recipient local-part length limits.
*opinions - because no mail operator seems to agree what it should be.
For context, RFC5321 defines local-part (the bit of an envelope address
to the left of the @ in an email
15 matches
Mail list logo