>I plotted a histogram of the resulting sizes here:
>
> http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwmalone/smtpsize.png
Can I just say I think it's great that we have nmh users who actually
do this? It's things like this that keep me going!
--Ken
--
nmh-workers
> > http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwmalone/smtpsize.png
> Interesting, thanks. So the 50 GB (GiB?) bucket halves in the two years
> from 2016 to 2018?
Actually - I had the graph titled wrong. Those should all be MB not
GB - I've fixed the graph now. Sorry about that!
But, yes - in 2016 there
Hi David,
> http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwmalone/smtpsize.png
Interesting, thanks. So the 50 GB (GiB?) bucket halves in the two years
from 2016 to 2018?
--
Cheers, Ralph.
https://plus.google.com/+RalphCorderoy
--
nmh-workers
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/nmh-workers
I thought I'd have a quick look at what SIZE values SMTP servers
are advertising. Censys have a EHLO banner grab for all of the IPv4
address space from both 2016 and 2018. In 2016, they recorded 4352858
EHLOs, of which 3950125 had a SIZE response. In 2018 the figures
were 6077111 EHLOs with
Ralph wrote:
> Hi Norm,
>
> > Is there some de facto or de jure upper limit to the size of an Email?
>
> Methods of limiting include fetchmail(1)'s `-l' option that leaves the
> email on the remote POP3 or IMAP server and just states its too-large
> size instead, and postfix's
>Although this is not an nmh question, it is an Email question.
>
>Is there some de facto or de jure upper limit to the size of an Email?
I suspect if you get more than 32 bits in terms of size (2 GB) for a
single message you might overflow some integers in nmh, but don't quote
me on that. I
