On Fri, Aug 23, 2002 at 06:11:44PM +0200, Brad Knowles wrote:
> At 9:17 AM -0400 2002/08/23, Jim Popovitch wrote:
> > Interesting... mail.merit.edu seems to be running Postfix.
>
> Indeed, that was part of my point. They've already made a pretty
> good choice for an MTA to handle mail f
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Chris Adams wrote:
> Well, on the thread in question, my response took 15 minutes to get back
> to me (well, 15:06 to be precise). That is by far the largest RTT for a
> list that I've posted to lately (not counting lists with servers down,
> etc.).
>
Here are two example
At 12:09 AM 8/22/2002, Chris Adams wrote:
>Once upon a time, Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> > Show me the headers that demonstrate these delays. On the
> > message I am responding to, I see an end-to-end delay of just a few
> > minutes, and that amount of time could easily be ac
Once upon a time, Brad Knowles <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> Show me the headers that demonstrate these delays. On the
> message I am responding to, I see an end-to-end delay of just a few
> minutes, and that amount of time could easily be accounted for by
> your clock being slightly off
At 12:09 AM +0200 2002/08/22, Mikael Abrahamsson wrote:
> I guess that if mail sent to the nanog list wouldnt take 5-60 minutes to
> get delivered to all people on the list, people would sooner see that
> someone else has actually answered the email in question, and wont answer
> themselves.
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Vinny Abello wrote:
>
> OK. People can stop correcting me now. :) I did catch the mistake
> immediately after I sent the email. Now something REALLY useful in an email
> client would be an unsend feature... I'm joking of course. I have to say
> that before I get slammed
