On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 06:47:57PM -0500, Dan Melomedman is rumored to have said: > > Steve Thomas wrote: > > > SMTP is just a part of the infrastructure design, but it's not robust. > > > > I disagree. It was designed in such a way so that no message could ever be > > completely lost, barring a catastrophic event (disk crash, alien invasion.. > > ;) > > You are not talking about SMTP, you are talking about the > infrastructure in that sentence.
Actually, I _am_ talking about SMTP. From RFC2821 "Simple Mail Transfer Protocol": "The objective of the Simple Mail Transfer Protocol (SMTP) is to transfer mail reliably and efficiently." "...a formal handoff of responsibility for the message occurs: the protocol requires that a server accept responsibility for either delivering a message or properly reporting the failure to do so." "SMTP is widely deployed and high-quality implementations have proven to be very robust." etc.. Sendmail, exim, postfix, etc. are just pieces of software that follow a set of rules. Like accounting software, all it has to do is follow a pre-defined set of rules in order to do its job effectively. Everything else is just gravy, and a lot of bells and whistles does not an MTA make... if it breaks the rules, it's either a poor piece of software or a good piece of software that's poorly configured. > > > Some people have recommended better designs, but nothing has been > > > finalized yet. See cr.yp.to/im2000.html for instance. > > > > Interesting, but I don't see how it's a better design. It might help curb > > the spam problem, but in no way is it robust. What it does is make e-mail > > slow and unreliable. Storing messages on the sender's server is (IMHO) not > > a good solution. > > Reread that page, you obviously don't understand it. What's not to understand? "Each message is stored under the sender's disk quota at the sender's ISP." "The sender's ISP, rather than the receiver's ISP, is the always-online post office from which the receiver picks up the message." Seems pretty clear to me. You (the sender) send me a message. Your ISP stores it in a special part of your mail spool and somehow (this part hasn't been figured out) notifies me of a waiting message. When I check my mail, I connect to your ISPs server and download your message. Like I said, it's an interesting idea, but I don't see it as a very good one. I wouldn't mind continuing this conversation, as it's an interesting topic, but I think we should take it off-list. It doesn't have anything to do with SA at this point. St- -- "But at my back I always hear Time's winged chariot hurrying near." - Andrew Marvell (1621-1678)
