Mailing List Archive: Re: Exim 5.x

Mailing List Archive: exim: users
Re: Exim 5.x

Index | Next | Previous | View Flat

iane at sussex

May 20, 2011, 2:49 AM

Views: 702
Permalink

Re: Exim 5.x [In reply to]

On 19 May 2011, at 18:27, W B Hacker wrote:

> Ian Eiloart wrote:
>>
>> On 19 May 2011, at 13:35, W B Hacker wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> part allows integration with an IMAP server, a message is
>>>> submitted with a an IMAP url to allow forward without download,
>>>> etc.
>>>
>>> ??
>>>
>>> IF the content is already located at a URI, all that is needed is
>>> the URI. We all get such - mostly as advertising.
>>
>> No, the point is not to put a URI in a message, but to put it in the
>> SMTP conversation. The URI refers to some content to be found on an
>> IMAP server. The SMTP server fetches that content, and appends it to
>> the message. The point is to avoid having your mobile device upload a
>> large attachment that's already available on the server.
>>
>
> But that protects only the *senders* handheld from overload.
>
> The recipient - who may ALSO be device, time, b/w, or all of the above constrained, gets the whole shebang. Like it or not.

Yes, it does. But that's fine. At worst, it means the benefit is halved. But there are other factors that improve the situation:

1. The recipient will often have better bandwidth.
2. Mobile devices usually don't download attachments without asking first.
3. I'm not an expert in such matters, but I believe that mobile connections are assymetric: sending data uses more power than receiving. Therefore one has less bandwidth to send than to receive. And, more power means less battery life.

And, yes, there are other ways of reducing bandwidth. But none of them apply in the case that I've received an email that I need to forward to a third party - perhaps so that they can deal with it while I'm away from the office.
>
>> Well 8bitmime is implemented almost everywhere.
>
> That one 'has traction', yes. And we should see what still needs doing...
>
> Such as MTA being able to detect lack of ability at the far-end, and reformat, or perhaps wrap - the whole of an often massive message.

That is the plan, apparently.

> Preferably on the fly and in-session rather than back-off, remember, and retry - so as to convey it in a manner the other MTA CAN accept.
>
> No mean feat in some instances, but the available horsepower is far more likely today than yesteryear.

Yes, I don't think horsepower is a serious issue for anyone with fewer than a million subscribers. Given that most large sites are fine with 8bitmime, translation will only be required for a minority of messages.

--
Ian Eiloart
Postmaster, University of Sussex
+44 (0) 1273 87-3148

--
## List details at https://lists.exim.org/mailman/listinfo/exim-users
## Exim details at http://www.exim.org/
## Please use the Wiki with this list - http://wiki.exim.org/

Subject	User	Time
Exim 5.x	odhiambo at gmail	May 17, 2011, 8:46 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	mihamina at bbs	May 17, 2011, 8:55 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	John.Burnham at admin	May 17, 2011, 8:59 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	odhiambo at gmail	May 17, 2011, 9:21 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	exim-users at lists	May 17, 2011, 10:09 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	D.H.Davis at bath	May 18, 2011, 1:53 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 18, 2011, 2:31 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 18, 2011, 3:30 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	jh at plonk	May 18, 2011, 7:15 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 19, 2011, 2:58 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	dwmw2 at infradead	May 19, 2011, 3:09 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	exim-users at spodhuis	May 19, 2011, 3:32 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 3:24 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 19, 2011, 3:56 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 5:35 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 19, 2011, 9:41 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 10:27 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 20, 2011, 2:49 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 11:05 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 12:39 PM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 20, 2011, 2:36 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	pdp at exim	May 20, 2011, 3:16 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 20, 2011, 4:18 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	pdp at exim	May 7, 2012, 4:20 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 20, 2011, 2:43 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 20, 2011, 3:48 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	iane at sussex	May 20, 2011, 7:38 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 20, 2011, 9:05 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	dwmw2 at infradead	May 19, 2011, 6:19 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	pdp at exim	May 19, 2011, 3:50 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	odhiambo at gmail	May 19, 2011, 4:00 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	lists at steffen-heil	May 19, 2011, 4:29 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 5:37 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	dominic at lenny	May 19, 2011, 4:35 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	exim-users at spodhuis	May 19, 2011, 6:36 AM
Re: admin defined queue [was Exim 5.x]	nigel at dotdot	May 19, 2011, 6:59 AM
Re: admin defined queue [was Exim 5.x]	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 7:13 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 7:10 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	wbh at conducive	May 19, 2011, 7:43 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	dominic at lenny	May 19, 2011, 8:49 AM
Re: Exim 5.x	pdp at exim	May 20, 2011, 3:26 AM

Index | Next | Previous | View Flat

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads