Re: [exim] Valid Chars in Headers of Emails

Craig Whitmore wrote:
>>- China, India, Brazil alone, not to mention Malaysia, Indonesia, most of
>>Africa, all of the Middle East, Scandinavia, Turkey, Russia, the 'former
>>East
>>Bloc', and much of Africa all use national languages that do not fit
>>ASCII neatly.
>>
>>Computer and internet use in these areas is no longer insignificant.
>>
>>The 'net is becoming less and less an 'English only' exercise with each
>>passing
>>year.
>
>
> So your saying we should allow 8 bit and Double Chars in all emails from
> everywhere

'Allow', yes. On your 'incoming' from remote servers, certainly.

As to your own user-group, you might be able to stick with 7-level USASCII for
composition (in the MUA settings). WinFools are harder to control, seem to love
composing in html.

As every one of my clients has *at least* two languages they work in, I must
support UTF8 and several others.

> and MIME encoding is no longer needed?
>

Separate issue. Base-64, and even UUENCODE are still standard/common, and there
is a huge world in MIME and SMIME types that probably won't be signiifcantly
simplified in my lifetime anyway. Though I have seen vacuum tubes almost
disappear from computers.

> Remember I am talkign about in the Headers Only. Here is a same of the
> rejected messages from the rule in the last 12 hours. I checked and that all
> quoted MIME (and where correctly MIME encoded for the body of the message),
> but they didn't encode the Subject correctly. <X> = the ASCII code.
>

???

> Subject: Our Pro<92>s do the selling so you don<92>t have to!
> Subject: Don<92>t be against getting pleasureUse Viagra Pro.
> Subject: Property Hunter <96> New Listings
> Subject: Get 1500 by tomorrow <96> apply
> Subject: john,You don<92>t want to miss Automated Millions !
> Subject: Dr. Pratt<92>s Prescription for a New You!
> Subject: Which do you prefer? Cingular® or Verizon®?
> Subject: It<92>s New. It<92>s Profitable
> Subject: S^?^Q<9F><9B>÷úÖESCwÛßQ¼¸ÖxvÚ
> Subject: $250 to dress up your little one with Gap® clothes.
> Subject: FW: <96><9C><97>¢<8E>q<82>Å<82>·
> Subject: Conventional wisdom is wrong again<85>
>

Not sure what you are attemptng to illustrate here.

iso-8859-1 and one or more common WIN-proprietary and Mac-idiosyncratic
encodings are out of step with ASCII, but an apostophe should be OK even in
64-char subset of USASCII (all caps+ common punctuation), a la chaintrain & drum
printers, e.g. DataPrinter CT1064, Sheppard 600, etc.

Perchance is some spammer composing in an Eastern European encoding?

Spam filtering and MIME defanging are different issues from the 'Subject:" encoding.

Your MUA or on-box editor settings may be what you are really loking at, not Exim.

Bill