[Top] [All Lists]

Re: large messages

1991-08-16 08:42:52


We've run into a problem in distributing the Internet Monthly Report.
It seems that some of the people recently added to the distribution 
list (primarily by being on the ietf list) are behind mail relays or 
have mail systems that do not handle large messages.
This is their problem not yours. 
IF an organization says that they will not accept mail messages over xK 
that is non conformance of RFC821/822 as there are no specified limits on length
of messages and these people should be made aware of their non conformance. 

IF this is because of broken software it needs to be fixed or replaced!!!

This is a problem for these people, and they in turn ask us to break the
large message into pieces and send the pieces as separate messages.  This
is more work for us.  Should we do it, or should we ask that these mail
systems be fixed?
My personal oppinion is to not break the messges down but tell them where 
they can ftp the messages from. We need to make the TOPS-x0 people 
aware that the world is a dynamic and evolving entity not a static one.  
And if they keep resisting progress they should be left behind!!!

ps. Ann Westine of course expresed this more politly. 

   To: postel(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU
   Subject: REsponse from Compuserve RE: large messages
   Date: Thu, 15 Aug 91 14:45:32 PDT
   From: Ann Westine <westine(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU>
   Hi Jon,
   Now what?  The Compuserve user(s) were on the IETF list.
      ------- Forwarded Message
   Date:    15 Aug 91 01:05:50 -0400 
   From:    <SAM(_at_)CSI(_dot_)compuserve(_dot_)com>
   To:      Ann Westine <westine(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU>, 
   Subject: Re: Msg too l > arge
   I wish it was a simple matter to raise the maximum message size
   beyond 50,000 bytes.  Unfortunately, it will take a major rewrite
   of a lot of code in order to accomplish it.  (If you've every
   written code on a TOPS-10 based system that runs with a couple
   of hundred simultaneous users, you'd understand.)
   We do have the item on the queue to rework that code, but it
   is currently unscheduled.  The best I can do at this time is
   suggest that you split your messages into pieces that are
   smaller than 50,000 bytes.
   Sorry I can't be of more help.
     - Sam
   - ----
   Sam Neely, CompuServe Incorporated                    +1 614 457 8600 (vo
   5000 Arlington Centre Blvd, Columbus, OH  43220  +1 614 457 0348 (FAX)
   Electronic Mail:  InfoPlex: >CSI:SAM      Internet: 
    ------- End of Forwarded Message
   To: postmaster(_at_)compuserve(_dot_)com, 
   Cc: westine(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU, 70217(_dot_)3660(_at_)compuserve(_dot_)com
  >   Subject: Re: Msg too large
   Date: Wed, 14 Aug 91 15:32:54 PDT
   From: Ann Westine <westine(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU>
   It is common practice of Internet users to send messages which may be
   over 50,000 bytes.  If you want to participate in exchanging mail
   between Compuserve usesrs and the Internet in general, you will need
   to fix your mail service to accommodate large messages.
   Thank you.
   Ann Westine
                   *********MESSAGE-No. 1 *******

   > The enclosed note was blocked by the Internet/CompuServe mail gateway;
   > delivery has not been attempted to any of the intended recipients.
   > The enclosed note is larger than 50,000 bytes and was destined for at
   > least one ordinary "subscriber" account at CompuServe.  CompuServe
   > subscriber accounts cannot receive mail of this size; this is an
   > administrative decision on the part of CompuServe to prevent disc
   > space overruns by users getting more mail than they can deal with.  If
   > you need to send items  > this large, they will have to be broken up in
   > smaller pieces and mailed separately.
   > To: Internet-Research-Group:;
   > Subject: Internet Monthly Report
   > Date: Tue, 13 Aug 91 13:37:33 PDT
   > From: Ann Westine <westine(_at_)ISI(_dot_)EDU>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>