Subj : Re: Max subject length: 71 or 72 chars?
To   : Ward Dossche
From : Carol Shenkenberger
Date : Fri Oct 11 2019 04:34 pm

  Re: Re: Max subject length: 71 or 72 chars?
  By: Ward Dossche to Rob Swindell on Tue Aug 27 2019 05:01 pm

 > Hi Rob,
 > 
 > RS> I'm pointing out the issues with the "subject" definition. Did you want
 > RS> me to quote the entire spec?
 > 
 > Oh dear ...
 > 
 > Something was clear for all the developers since 1990, there were a lot of
 > them, and now suddenly it's an issue?
 > 
 > RS> > And do you also know where the "71" comes from ?
 > 
 > RS> Well, I took 72 and subtracted 1 (for the required null byte). I assume
 > RS> the 72 came from 36 (the total length of the to and from fields)
 > RS> multiplied by 2. Is there some other significance of 71 that I'm not
 > RS> aware of?
 > 
 > My IT experience starts somewhere in the very late 1960, punchcard heaven.
 > 
 > A punch card had 80 columns, 1-71 were used for coding statements, 72 was th
 > continuation column if something didn't fit in 71 positions, then it continu
 > on the next card, 73-80 contained the sequence number of that card in the wh
 > deck of punch cards.
 > 
 > It's not certain but my bet is the 71 comes from there, someone's
 > knowledge/experience embedded in punchcard technology.
 > 
 > Just like the old length of the system name limited to 51 or 52 or something
 > It also finds its origin in programming techniques from days gone by ... I
 > think.
 > 
 >  \%/@rd
 > 

FYI, it may be a replication of old ARPANET where the 'chat' was limited to 71
characters and a return.  Yeah, I go back a ways.
  xxcarol
--- SBBSecho 2.11-Win32
 * Origin: SHENK'S EXPRESS telnet://shenks.synchro.net (1:275/100)

.