Apologies for spam - we will blacklist that account right away
harish.pillay at gmail.com
Fri Dec 28 03:34:35 CET 2007
[we are getting way off topic here]
On Dec 27, 2007 9:02 PM, GWMobile <geopilot at mindspring.com> wrote:
> I strongly disagree with you here.
> Email should be instanteous and if the specs haven't been updated to
> call for that then the specs are outdated.
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2821.html section 18.104.22.168 on "Sending Strategy"
"The general model for an SMTP client is one or more processes that
periodically attempt to transmit outgoing mail. In a typical system,
the program that composes a message has some method for requesting
immediate attention for a new piece of outgoing mail, while mail that
cannot be transmitted immediately MUST be queued and periodically
retried by the sender. A mail queue entry will include not only the
message itself but also the envelope information.
The sender MUST delay retrying a particular destination after one
attempt has failed. In general, the retry interval SHOULD be at
least 30 minutes; however, more sophisticated and variable strategies
will be beneficial when the SMTP client can determine the reason for
Retries continue until the message is transmitted or the sender gives
up; the give-up time generally needs to be at least 4-5 days. The
parameters to the retry algorithm MUST be configurable."
> I don't stay on groups with email delays because it is impossible to
> have a conversation.
It would more appropriate if the right tools were used for the right job.
If you need to have "instantaneous conversations", email was never
meant for that. IRC and instant messaging is what you need. Email
is great for threads of discussions that can be archieved, searched
and worked on.
However, if you think it is important that email be instantaneous like
IRC, do please work on updating RFC2821.
Harish Pillay h.pillay at ieee.org gpg id: 74609E3
fingerprint: F7F5 5CCD 25B9 FC25 303E 3DA2 0F80 27DB 7468 09E3
More information about the community