🚀 go-pugleaf

larry@gator.rn.com (Larry Snyder) writes:

>x10066@raphael.corp.mot.com writes:

>>Can somebody tell me what are the ill-effects of having an article
>>posted which is larger than the recommended size of 64k ?

>for one thing -- the fidonet gates would crop -- since they can
>only handle messages of something like 10K -- which is about
>worthless when it comes to the usenet world.

>In fact, some of the fidonet software doesn't like anything larger
>than 8K.  Like I said, worthless in the real world -- tolerable
>in the amateur network.

No, Fidonet Technical Standards do *not* set a limit on message size.
As in the Usenet world, there are some braindead *programs* that
can't handle things.

I know of *no* Fidonet software with a limit in k. I know of several
that have problems with the number of *lines*. (several chop message
bodies at line 100, one chops at line 299)

I regularly get the RISKS Digest on my Fido node. The gateway chops
it into sections, but it gets thru to me.

btw, Fido is no more "amatuer" than Usenet is "professional". Both
nets have sites that fit those descriptions. They also have sites
that are the opposite.

-- 
Leonard Erickson		      leonard@qiclab.scn.rain.com
CIS: [70465,203]			 70465.203@compuserve.com
FIDO:   1:105/51	 Leonard.Erickson@f51.n105.z1.fidonet.org
(The CIS & Fido addresses are preferred)