Dňa 12. mája 2023 13:40:14 UTC používateľ Paul Gregg via mailop
<mailop@mailop.org> napísal:
>4.5.3.1. Size Limits and Minimums
When you read RFC, you MUST read all, not only interesting parts.
Yes, sometime it is hard, but notice the sentence in this section:
Every implementation MUST be able to receive objects of at
least these sizes.
I understand that these limits are not maximum which can be
used, but rather minimum which have to be supported. That
is shown in the same section latter:
To the maximum extent possible, implementation techniques
that impose no limits on the length of these objects should be
used.
It IMO clearly suggests to not limit these things.
IMO, one have to consider, that there was more resorce constrained
HW in time of that RFC and even nowadays there can be embeded
systems with no GBs of RAM (and so). If that is not your case,
simple do not limit on that, or limit on values which can be harmfull
for you (eg. file system mailbox name length limits, or so).
If you really want, apply mentioned limits to your outgoing messages
only. Do you know: be strict on what you send, and be liberal on
what you receive. But if you really not need them, applying these
limits is wasting of resorces, for checking, for develop rules, for
testing, for maintaining, for support responses...
When you apply these limits, you will not prevent SPAMs, nor
phishings, nor scams, only ugly addresses and we have bigger
problems than ugly addresses :-)
regards
--
Slavko
https://www.slavino.sk/
_______________________________________________
mailop mailing list
mailop@mailop.org
https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
