nanog mailing list archives
Re: EMAIL != FTP
From: David Lesher <wb8foz () nrk com>
Date: Sat, 26 May 2001 09:55:59 -0400 (EDT)
A) A friend got bit badly by the "anything I can attach I will" syndrome. He was in the UK, and the usual USG local POP (from PSI) was FUBAR. So he called back to DC to get urgent mail. Some MITRE genius had attacked a 10+meg PowerPointless file to his message to 100+ folks, including Friend. Friend err (rather you & I) paid a VERY large phone bill for that braindeadness. B) I'm intrigued by the proposal for pseudo attachments. Hmm, what's really needed? 1) User still points & clicks. 2) MUA uploads attachment to its designated server. 3) MUA attaches URL & password to message. 4) Recipient gets mail and grabs attachment. 5) Server knows who has gotten file, keeps track. 6) 24 hours after last recipient has claimed it, or {say} 1 week later, it deletes it. Replaces with "it's expired, have it resent" for whenever. (Gee, this sounds like news and history files...) All this needs to work is for say Eudora and Mutt to both offer it. Once a critical mass of sysadms deploy same, and crank down the limit to 100K, more will. (I say Eudora because M$ will resist anything that interoperates....) -- A host is a host from coast to coast.................wb8foz () nrk com & no one will talk to a host that's close........[v].(301) 56-LINUX Unless the host (that isn't close).........................pob 1433 is busy, hung or dead....................................20915-1433
Current thread:
- Re: EMAIL != FTP, (continued)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Mitch Halmu (May 26)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Valdis . Kletnieks (May 26)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Mitch Halmu (May 27)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Jim Mercer (May 27)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Steve Sobol (May 28)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Scott Francis (May 27)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Jim Mercer (May 26)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Sabri Berisha (May 28)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP Stephen J. Wilcox (May 26)
- Re: EMAIL != FTP David Lesher (May 26)