6600pete@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (10/30/89)
Does anybody have any guidelines for the maximum size it is reasonable to expect the smallest-capacity mailer out there to have? In other words, what size message am I limited to if I can't know ahead-of-time the size of message a given mailer can handle? What's the worst (smallest) case? -- | Pete Gontier, pete@cavevax.ucsb.edu; outgoing .UUCP addresses bounce | Editor: Macker, the online Mac programmer's journal <== coming soon! | Underground BBS: rlogin 128.111.41.100 -l bbs, pseudonyms allowed | This kid is looking for a job: Mac, DOS, C, Pascal, some 68000, 8088 | excellent communication skills
chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) (10/31/89)
According to 6600pete@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu: >Does anybody have any guidelines for the maximum size it is reasonable >to expect the smallest-capacity mailer out there to have? A brain-dead mailer on a 16-bit machine could conceivably choke on messages with a total size of 32K or greater. Allowing for headers and other cruft, I'd limit each mail message to 28K or so. -- You may redistribute this article only to those who may freely do likewise. Chip Salzenberg at A T Engineering; <chip@ateng.com> or <uunet!ateng!chip> "'Why do we post to Usenet?' Naturally, the answer is, 'To get a response.'" -- Brad "Flame Me" Templeton
ok@cs.mu.oz.au (Richard O'Keefe) (10/31/89)
In article <254CF7C8.22537@ateng.com>, chip@ateng.com (Chip Salzenberg) writes: > A brain-dead mailer on a 16-bit machine could conceivably choke on messages > with a total size of 32K or greater. Allowing for headers and other cruft, > I'd limit each mail message to 28K or so. Too big. I've run into a couple of relays recently that have 25k limits. It's not only the ideal capacity of the mailer that counts, but how much a site is willing to forward.