Subject: Re: #1008 USEFOR 1.5 References: Final text on "followup"

From: John Stanley <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2005 11:04:13 -0700 (PDT)

Bruce Lilly <blilly@xxxxxxxxx>:

>> There is, 998 is the precise limit (unfolded without CrLf) for
>> the References and at least some news servers.

>The RFC 2822 998 limit is per line, not unfolded.
 
While RFC2822 may have a 998 per line limit, USEFOR-04 has a 998 per 
"header" limit. In section 2.2:

   o  Compliant software MUST NOT generate (but MAY accept) headers of
      more than 998 octets. 

But just earlier:

   This specification uses the terms "header", "header name", and
   "header content" which are synonymous with the [RFC2822] terms
   "header field", "field name", and "field body" respectively.

So the USEFOR limit is on the "header field" (as used in RFC2822), not the
individual line in that field, which is what RFC2822 puts its limit on. In
other words, USEFOR has a stricter limit on this than RFC2822.

And that isn't just for References and a few others, it applies to all.

>As mentioned earlier, we have a rather long-standing agreement that
>there is no field length limit.  Reintroducing one *is* controversial.

I don't know about "reintroduced". I see it in USEFOR-03, so it's been
around for awhile. I don't recall an agreement, but then, I don't
particularly care if there is a limit or not, just that we don't look
stupid by saying there is and then is not a limit in the same section.

Which comes from the direct contradiction in a NOTE that follows:

         NOTE: There is NO restriction on the number of lines into which
         a header may be split, and hence there is NO restriction on the
         total length of a header (in particular it may, by suitable
         folding, be made to exceed the 998 octets restriction
         pertaining to a single header line).
                                                                                
You cannot "suitably fold" something to create something that you MUST NOT 
create in the first place. 

But I mentioned this yesterday.

---

From: "Charles Lindsey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 13:57:39 GMT

>   o  Compliant software MUST NOT generate (but MAY accept) headers of

Yes that has already been pointed out, and I think we all agree that it is
a Bug in USEFOR, and I hope Ken is in process of fixing it.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Tel: +44 161 436 6131 Fax: +44 161 436 6133   Web: http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: [email-masked]      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9      Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5