Dominic Raferd:
> On 18/06/2020 17:17, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> > On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 15:03, Wietse Venema wrote:
> >> Dominic Raferd:
> >>> I understand the reason for smtp_line_length_limit and for its default
> >>> value of 998, which is of course good.
> >> It breaks DKIM signatures, it is n
On 18/06/2020 17:17, Dominic Raferd wrote:
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 15:03, Wietse Venema wrote:
Dominic Raferd:
I understand the reason for smtp_line_length_limit and for its default
value of 998, which is of course good.
It breaks DKIM signatures, it is needed only for mail that is sent
via SM
On Thu, 18 Jun 2020 at 15:03, Wietse Venema wrote:
>
> Dominic Raferd:
> > I understand the reason for smtp_line_length_limit and for its default
> > value of 998, which is of course good.
>
> It breaks DKIM signatures, it is needed only for mail that is sent
> via SMTP, and worse, it breaks lines
On 18 Jun 2020, at 09:24, Wietse Venema wrote:
> @lbutlr:
>> No, wrapping header lines does not affect DKIM if it is configured =
>> properly. The correct setting is c=3Drelaxed which means that white =
>
> smtp_line_length_limit breaks DKIM relaxed mode, because it does
> not wrap lines. That wo
@lbutlr:
> No, wrapping header lines does not affect DKIM if it is configured =
> properly. The correct setting is c=3Drelaxed which means that white =
smtp_line_length_limit breaks DKIM relaxed mode, because it does
not wrap lines. That would require an understanding of header
or body contant tha
Dominic Raferd:
> I understand the reason for smtp_line_length_limit and for its default
> value of 998, which is of course good.
It breaks DKIM signatures, it is needed only for mail that is sent
via SMTP, and worse, it breaks lines in the middle of a multibyte
character (and of course in the mid
On 18 Jun 2020, at 05:38, Dominic Raferd wrote:
> I understand the reason for smtp_line_length_limit and for its default
> value of 998, which is of course good.
>
> But it is an occasional problem for me that this wrapping action is
> only applied at smtp stage and not earlier; in particular it
