On Thu, 16 Apr 1998, Georg v.Zezschwitz wrote:
> > I must say that I am wary of implementing too much complication, as I
> > have found over the 30 years I've been in this business that it is very
> > easy to implement huge and grandiose schemes that actually achieve very
> > little in practice in real situations. That's probably why I was
> > attracted to the simple way Smail 3 worked, which I imitated in Exim.
> > There's a lot to be said for KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid).
>
> I consider this a bit disappointing, as I associate Exim with
> technological lead.
I did say I was "wary", not that I am totally against making any
specific changes.
> Why should Exim not support Enhanced Error Codes?
>
> There is absolutely nothing else to do but adding 3 numbers ahead
> of every error code.
What is gained? What do other people on this mailing list think?
> Why should Exim not support DSN?
I have been told that it is a very bloated thing. I have not looked at
the RFCs myself yet, so I can't judge.
> But more than 50% of the servers I deliver mail to offer 8BITMIME, and
> probably in 2-3 years it will be 90%, and Exim might be one of those
> 10% "dinosaurs of a former age", which claim to need 7-bit-Mails.
Exim is, and always has been, 8-bit clean. I believe the continued
insistence on 7-bit standards is really silly. TCP/IP has always been an
8-bit transport. (Here I am in complete agreement with Dan Bernstein.)
"Just-send-8" has more success than munging the message in any way. If
you set "accept_8bitmime" Exim will "offer" 8BITMIME in the ESMTP
greeting, but it won't do anything other than just send the message it
gets.
--
Philip Hazel University Computing Service,
ph10@??? New Museums Site, Cambridge CB2 3QG,
P.Hazel@??? England. Phone: +44 1223 334714
--
*** Exim information can be found at
http://www.exim.org/ ***
