Hi Cyril The RFC you linked states "This number may be increased by the use of SMTP Service Extensions."
This sounds to me like: Longer lines might work, but are not guaranteed. So why not stick to the official limit of 998 + CRLF? What's the purpose of having longer linses? After all they can be folded, can't they? https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5322 > Am 17.05.2024 um 08:48 schrieb Cyril - ImprovMX via mailop > <mailop@mailop.org>: > > Hi everyone! > > I've got an email from one of my user telling me our server refused an email > because of a line too long. > The issue is referenced in the RFC at > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc5321#section-4.5.3.1.6 and we follow > and respect that recommandation. > > I would not have raised this question here except that the user recently > moved from Cloudflare to us, and they shared with us a past email sent by > Sendgrid, that went through Cloudflare, and landed in their gmail inbox > successfully, **despite having a line of 1201 characters. > > So, I wonder, is there another RFC that specifies a bigger line length, or > are the RFC here just for decoration? > > Thank you for your help! > > Best regards, > Cyril - ImprovMX <https://improvmx.com/> > _______________________________________________ > mailop mailing list > mailop@mailop.org > https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
_______________________________________________ mailop mailing list mailop@mailop.org https://list.mailop.org/listinfo/mailop
