Re: [Imap-protocol] Working around the evils of LITERAL+
Alexey Melnikov <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.imap.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 26 Mar 2013, at 23:03, Brandon Long <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Mar 26, 2013 at 2:52 PM, Timo Sirainen <[email protected]> wrote: > On 26.3.2013, at 23.26, Brandon Long <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This was because of some unfortunate combination of factors. For one, we have a maximum message size on our server, with no real way to make that available to IMAP (maybe via GETQUOTA, but if no clients check it, that's not that useful). For two, we have an inbound bandwidth quota to protect against both broken clients and attempts to use Gmail IMAP as a storage system. > > > > So, if a user attempted to draft a message larger than our limit (35MB), > > Seems a bit small limit to me. > > Heh, sure, we get that from some users from time to time, but almost every part of our system requires loading the whole message into memory at some point (or two copies), and that adds up quick. And its fairly typical from the major webmail providers. And frankly, SMTP is a pretty poor file transfer protocol, what with the base64 encoding and the lack of checksumming or restartability and the duplicate delivery vagueness. > > And that limit is advertised via EHLO at SMTP time, but there's no mechanism for doing that with IMAP. Let's standardize a way to advertise such limit. I might have use for it as well. _______________________________________________ Imap-protocol mailing list [email protected] http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol