Hi There are *some* mail outfits that will reject anything over 64K bytes. I have not had to deal with any for a while, but they are still out there. How they continue to operate with those sort of limits, I have no idea.
Bob On Jul 11, 2014, at 3:49 PM, Tom Van Baak (lab) <t...@leapsecond.com> wrote: > Paul, > > Your expectation works for text attachments. But binary attachments (e.g., > jpg) expand about 33%. That's 8/6, or log2(256)/log2(64), due to base64 > encoding of 8-bit bytes. > > In general, large attachments on this list are ok. It's just that when they > are above 128k they are temporarily held for manual review. I let most of > them go through with little delay. > > /tvb (i5s) > >> On Jul 11, 2014, at 9:21 AM, paul swed <paulsw...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Trying to keep the message and attachements below the 128KB limit. >> I send a 119KB message and it gets held as a 165KB message. >> Can someone help me to understand the difference please? >> Thanks >> Paul >> WB8TSL >> _______________________________________________ >> time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com >> To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts >> and follow the instructions there. > _______________________________________________ > time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com > To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts > and follow the instructions there. _______________________________________________ time-nuts mailing list -- time-nuts@febo.com To unsubscribe, go to https://www.febo.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/time-nuts and follow the instructions there.
