On 3/21/21 8:13 PM, John Levine wrote:
> It appears that Wietse Venema said:
>> With uniform or compressed payloads, 256 bytes become 261 on average,
>> thus it takes 978.9 bytes on average to expand into 998. Add CR
>> and LF to the 998, and we have an expansion of 1000/978.9=1.022 or
>> just a
John Levine:
> It appears that Wietse Venema said:
> >With uniform or compressed payloads, 256 bytes become 261 on average,
> >thus it takes 978.9 bytes on average to expand into 998. Add CR
> >and LF to the 998, and we have an expansion of 1000/978.9=1.022 or
> >just a little over 2%.
>
> That
It appears that Wietse Venema said:
>With uniform or compressed payloads, 256 bytes become 261 on average,
>thus it takes 978.9 bytes on average to expand into 998. Add CR
>and LF to the 998, and we have an expansion of 1000/978.9=1.022 or
>just a little over 2%.
That was my estimate too. I
On Sun, Mar 21, 2021 at 04:38:56PM -0400, Wietse Venema wrote:
> With non-uniform input, or with input from a smaller alphabet, I
> expect that YMMV (the expansion can be less or more than 2%). For
> example 1000 null bytes expand into 2000 (100%), and when content
> requires no escaping, 998
John Levine:
> It appears that Wietse Venema said:
> >> BINARYMIME avoids the 33% size increase of base64. If people cared
> >> about that, since every MTA now supports 8BITMIME it would be easy
> >> to invent a quoted-unprintable content-transfer-encoding which
> >> escaped only the few
It appears that Wietse Venema said:
>> BINARYMIME avoids the 33% size increase of base64. If people cared
>> about that, since every MTA now supports 8BITMIME it would be easy
>> to invent a quoted-unprintable content-transfer-encoding which
>> escaped only the few characters that are special in
