[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > I have a slightly different take here
Thanks for the complete explanation. I'm aware of all the issues you mentioned; perhaps I should have explained more throughly. My response was specifically in regards to the forementioned Chinese charsets, not a blanket statement regarding any or all messages with base64 encoded header lines. i.e, I've never received a non-spam message with headers encoded in GB2312 or BIG5. YMMV of course. Even though I probably could bounce such encoded messages, I do not as they _might_ be legitimate for the reasons Sen outlined. I'm much more comfortable bouncing messages with non-ASCII in the headers, as that's a clear violation of RFC 2821, section 2.3.1. _____________________________________________ tmda-users mailing list ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) http://tmda.net/lists/listinfo/tmda-users
