MBOX-Line: From blong at google.com  Wed Jan 15 13:07:45 2014
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Brandon Long <blong@google.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:51 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Email charset statistics
In-Reply-To: <6a420a96-0755-48c3-b8d7-f208c6de14a1@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
References: <52D5D84D.6070208@verizon.net>
	<6a420a96-0755-48c3-b8d7-f208c6de14a1@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Message-ID: <CABa8R6vUg2RFxEobH9u+1pBxJ5C7u991EL9es2BBWJ3=ZGWpyw@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Jan 15, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no
> wrote:

> On Wednesday, January 15, 2014 2:08:47 AM CEST, Brandon Long wrote:
>
>> It also makes the downgrade part of RFC5738 look pretty silly, as I
>> imagine almost every IMAP server is basically doing the same thing today,
>> sending 8bits blindly, assuming the headers were 7bit clean.  It seems like
>> implementing RFC5738 makes your server break more messages than it fixes.
>>
>
> Yes, but why are you doing 5738 instead of 6855?


Didn't remember the exact rfc and did a quick search to find it.  Yes, I
meant 6855... which really could use more information on how its different
from 5738, as I look at both right now.  6855 just says it obsoletes 5738.

Brandon
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20140115/cea73807/attachment.html>
