Back to the main page

Mailing List Logs for ShadowRN

Message no. 1
From: jaimie.nicholson@********.otago.ac.nz (Jaimie Nicholson)
Subject: hey! (subject cut short)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 15:27:50 -0300
Hey, the end of my "subject" header-wossname seems to have been cut off!
That doesn't seem very fair. Is it the plotd things doing, or what? If so,
does anyone know the limit to subject length? Better read the FAQ again, I
guess.

(It said (in case anyone noticed an apparently nonsensical subject thing
and (less likely) gave a toss) "Watchers, watchers, and more damned
watchers. Could there _be_ anything more annoying than a watcher".)

PLAYTHING OF A CRUEL GOD...
JAIMIE NICHOLSON
Message no. 2
From: "Mark A. Imbriaco" <mark@******.net>
Subject: Re: hey! (subject cut short)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 1996 11:50:36 -0400 (EDT)
> Hey, the end of my "subject" header-wossname seems to have been cut off!
> That doesn't seem very fair. Is it the plotd things doing, or what? If so,
> does anyone know the limit to subject length? Better read the FAQ again, I
> guess.

Actually, you probably need to read the RFC for the SMTP protocol
if you want to know the max length. I don't know it off the top
of my head, though...

-Mark
Message no. 3
From: Evan Hughes <ehughes@****.carleton.ca>
Subject: Re: hey! (subject cut short)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 96 19:44:05 EDT
Mark A. Imbriaco writes:
> Actually, you probably need to read the RFC for the SMTP protocol
> if you want to know the max length. I don't know it off the top
> of my head, though...

It's big. Over 512 characters (thats the min for all field, je pense).


Evan Hughes | Webmaster
Honours Computer Science | Carleton Computer Science Society
http://chat.carleton.ca/~ehughes | http://omega.scs.carleton.ca/~ccss
.. code code code eat code code code code code sleep code code code code ..

Further Reading

If you enjoyed reading about hey! (subject cut short), you may also be interested in:

Disclaimer

These messages were posted a long time ago on a mailing list far, far away. The copyright to their contents probably lies with the original authors of the individual messages, but since they were published in an electronic forum that anyone could subscribe to, and the logs were available to subscribers and most likely non-subscribers as well, it's felt that re-publishing them here is a kind of public service.

Thwap!