This has been discussed several times over the last few years, and there
is agreement that the double-encoding ought to be avoided. There is not
agreement about which one out to be eliminated. The consequences are
different based on your deployment environment.
On 6/8/2010 1:57 PM, Nelson B Bolyard wrote:
Thunderbird's developers have received complaints about the relative size of
enveloped messages, as compared to the same message sent in plain text.
Investigation has shown that the message production
- creates the entire un-enveloped message, with any binary attachments
base64 encoded, then
- envelopes it, then
- base 64 encodes the enveloped message.
As some developers read it, this is the right/only way to do it.
They see the double-encoding as unavoidable.
It surely is wasteful of bandwidth and storage.
Is this double base64 encoding unavoidable?
Or is there something being overlooked here?
smime mailing list