Article View: news.admin
Article #3169Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k
From: Craig Jackson drilex1
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 01:10
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 01:10
14 lines
1080 bytes
1080 bytes
Excuse me if I'm saying something already said; I only read this group about
half the time.
I'm sure that the ancestral reason for the 64K limit was Notes. I remember
notes people complaining about large messages all the time, six or seven
years ago. Also, people complaining that Notes had mangled their messages.
Seeing as though Notes is not a big thing on the net these days, outside
of HP, I don't think that problem still exists.
As the previous poster mentioned, sendmail used to ship with a 100k limit.
--
Craig Jackson
dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com
{bbn,alliant,redsox,atexnet,ka3ovk}!drilex!{dricej,dricejb}
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<51774@drilex.dri.mgh.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!news.bbn.com!drilex!dricejbReferences:
<1992Sep22.200435.13018@schbbs.mot.com> <1992Sep25.154521.26353@athena.mit.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!think.com!news.bbn.com!drilex!dricejb From: dricejb@drilex.dri.mgh.com (Craig Jackson drilex1) Newsgroups: news.admin Subject: Re: Ill-effects of a posting greater than 64k Date: 28 Sep 92 01:10:49 GMT Organization: DRI/McGraw-Hill, Lexington, MA Lines: 14 Message-ID: <51774@drilex.dri.mgh.com> References: <1992Sep22.200435.13018@schbbs.mot.com> <1992Sep25.154521.26353@athena.mit.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com