Re: Differences between RFC 2822 and Usefor

From: Bruce Lilly (blilly@erols.com)
Date: Fri May 02 2003 - 12:29:06 CDT


Kai Henningsen wrote:

> Where's "any particularly good reason to use" this rather contrived
> example?

"contrived example" is a red herring; of course the example illustrates
the issue -- it would be pointless to provide an example that did not do
so. The issue is that the "must have field body content other than WS
on first line" is incompatible with the line length limit when encoded-
words are present. The line length obviously includes the field name,
the colon, any whitespace, the encoded-word lead-in, delimiters, and
trailer, the charset name, asterisk and language if specified, and the
encoding name, the grand total being required to be 76 or less. The
example isn't even close to being a worst-case; there are *far* longer
field names than "Mail-Copies-To".




This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7.