[Mimedefang] Rejecting Cyrillic

[David F. Skoll]

Kenneth Porter wrote:

[D. Skoll]
>> Except UTF-8 penalizes those character sets that need two, three, ...
>> bytes to encode many of their characters.  For this reason, I expect all
>> the weird and wonderful legacy encodings to survive.

> Given that we have to suffer the proliferation of bad (ie. verbose) HTML
> in email, is tripling the size of the payload that high a cost?

:-) You have a point, but I don't think people will see it that way.

> (It might be interesting to see how much no-op HTML markup is in the
> average message.)

Oh, tons.  Tons and tons.  We actually strip HTML parts if there's a
multipart/alternative with text/html and text/plain; I reckon we're saving
about 25% of our e-mail storage.  (It would be more like 70% if it weren't
for large attachments.)

Regards,

David.