[ILUG] shfs vs. nfs

[Ole Tange]

On Sun, 31 Jul 2005, Rory Browne wrote:

> On 7/21/05, Dave O Connor <doc at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Because that would be altering the content of the email, which is a
> > big no-no in pretty much every sensible person's book.
> 
> I think that any sensible person would examine the situation and make
> a case by case analysis of what is sensable, instead of setting a
> certain way that has to apply for everything.
> 
> What exactly is wrong with making a slight change to the name of an
> attached file, so that it cannot infect your computer.

As long is it is very obvious to the recipient what has happened I believe
it is OK.

> > SMTP isn't a file transfer protocol. If you're having problems
> > transferring files with it, use a tool designed to transfer files.

I once believed that email was not a file transfer protocol and that
people should use tools designed for transfering files.

Then I met real users.

Email _is_ used for file transfer. People expect to be able to attach even
100 MB files to emails. And why shouldn't they? They understand how to
attach and de-attach files. There is no technical reason why they should
not be possible to do this. My observation is that they would much rather
wait for an email to be transfered - even with the 50% overhead - than
they would learn FTP and have the recipient set up an FTP-server that they
can upload to.


/Ole
-- 
Free software gives you the freedom to:
* F orward copies to anyone
* R un the program
* E xamine the source code
* E nhance the source code