#INTERNET DRAFT to be --- NEWS
#
# NEWS ARTICLE FORMAT AND TRANSMISSION
#
# (Henry Spencer)
#
[...]
# "SHOULD" means that the
# item is a strong recommendation: there may be valid reasons to ignore
# it in unusual circumstances, but this should be done only after
# careful study of the full implications and a firm conclusion that it
# is necessary, because there are serious disadvantages to doing so.
[...]
# Posters SHOULD limit posted articles to at most 60,000 octets,
# including headers and EOL representations, unless the articles are
# being posted only within a cooperating subnet which is known to be
# capable of handling larger articles gracefully. Posting agents
# presented with a large article SHOULD warn the poster and request
# confirmation.
#
# NOTE: The difference between this and the earlier "MUST"
# limit is margin for header growth, differing EOL
# representations, and transmission overheads.
#
# NOTE: Disagreeable though these limits are, it is a fact that
# in current networks, an article larger than 64K (after header
# growth etc.) simply is not transmitted reliably. Note also the
# comments above on the trauma caused by single extremelylarge
# articles now; the problems are real and current. These problems
# arguably should be fixed, but this will not happen network-wide
# in the immediate future. Hence the restriction of larger
# articles to cooperating subnets, for now.
-- Thomas Koenig, ig25@rz.uni-karlsruhe.de, ig25@dkauni2.bitnet. The joy of engineering is to find a straight line on a double logarithmic diagram.
[
Usenet Hypertext FAQ Archive |
Search Mail Archive |
Authors |
Usenet
]
[
1993 |
1994 |
1995 |
1996 |
1997
]
© Copyright The Landfield Group, 1997
All rights reserved