Not at all. "C-T-E: 8bit" simply states "this message body contains
short lines of 0-255". I don't think there's any ambiguity in RFC-1521:
a conformant UA receiving such a message will handle it correctly.
That's the consensus I think exist but Keith disagrees.
Then it's not a consensus, is it?
An ovbious reason that both "8bit" and "binary" exist is that RFC1426
supports "8bit" but not "binary".
Then why do both 8bit and binary exist in rfc 1321, which pre-dates rfc 1426?
The reason that both 8bit and binary exist in rfc 1321, is: at the time RFC
1321 was written, there were a great many MTAs that could safely transmit text
written with 8859/* character sets, but which were NOT binary transparent.
This is still the case today.
Keith