[Top] [All Lists]

Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call

2008-05-19 08:39:20

On Sat, 2008-05-17 at 13:57 -0400, John R Levine wrote:

Another one: String lengths.

You're right, it's a problem.  The hand-wave is to assert that few MTAs 
enforce the 64 character limit, but I realize that's not very persuasive 
for a standard.  On the other hand, since there's no nesting, the damage 
is at least predictable.  The current spec adds 16 characters to each 
address but I've been considering a modified version with 10 characters 
that addresses some greylisting problems as well.

As a data point, I have seen many European receivers choke on > 64 char
local parts. I don't have a list of those domains (and it was may 4
years ago), but when I tested a BATV like scheme here at work which
allowed > 64 characters, messages were not delivered.

:: Jeff Macdonald | Director of Messaging Technologies
:: e-Dialog | jmacdonald(_at_)e-dialog(_dot_)com
:: 131 Hartwell Ave. | Lexington, MA 02421
:: v: 781-372-1922 | f: 781-863-8118

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