On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 02:58:40PM +0100, Proinnsias Breathnach mentioned:
> Um, no, Large attachments are, from the networks' PoV the same as any
> other large transfer. Internally - a doddle on modern networks.
> Externally, not so hot, but hey - quotas work.
Hmm. I'm more thinking of cases where both the MX of the sender and
reciever have size limits. Someone sends a 200MB TIFF, and it bounces
around, chewing up bandwidth for weeks, till someone notices.
The other case is where you have a mail server with a lot of users. If
out of 30000 users, 1 in 50 mails has an attachment over a few hundred k,
suddenly queue management is a mess. If the destinations are slow, and you
have a build up of 200x2MB files in /var, it can get messy very very
quickly.
But that's gonna happen with any quick & dirty file transfer clearing
house. It's a shame that MUAs don't mark any mail with an attachment as
"bulk".
John
--
For astrology and the rest to flourish it is only necessary that those with
an IQ in double figures do nothing.
-- Lucy Mangan
Maintained by the ILUG website team. The aim of Linux.ie is to
support and help commercial and private users of Linux in Ireland. You can
display ILUG news in your own webpages, read backend
information to find out how. Networking services kindly provided by HEAnet, server kindly donated by
Dell. Linux is a trademark of Linus Torvalds,
used with permission. No penguins were harmed in the production or maintenance
of this highly praised website. Looking for the
Indian Linux Users' Group? Try here. If you've read all this and aren't a lawyer: you should be!
