That certainly used to be the case, especially with UUCP mail. But the widespread acceptance of SMTP rather changed that.
Nowadays, in fact, email is almost always point-to-point[1]. And in the particular case we are most concerned with here, pdml mail, the connection is direct from the mailing list hosting server to the mail server here at my ISP (as can easily be determined by examining the routing headers in the messages). [1] Well, technically, it still has to be routed through various other servers. But that's handled by the TCP/IP transport layer. The mail connection is a direct socket connection - there's no intermediate machine looking at the content of those packets[2], let alone identifying them as email messages. And I'm sure you're not suggesting that the fault lies in the TCP/IP transport or socket layer. [2] Except, quite probably, something operated by the NSA. Peter J. Alling mused: > > E-mail is not delivered directly, an intermediate server may be > "helpfully" deleting spam as well. > This could lead to all sorts of lost messages. > > John Francis wrote: > > >Unfortunately my earlier post about missing eMail rather undermines > >this theory. I receive my pdml posts at an ISP where I can be 100% > >certain that no such filtering takes place. Despite that, though, > >I don't get 100% of the pdml posts. > > > >It's quite possible that verizon (and hotmail, and earthlink, and ...) > >customers could lose additional email messages (although pdml posts > >aren't particularly likely to trigger any automated spam filters). > >But that can't explain messages not being delivered to my account, > >or to several other list members who have direct access to their > >own mail servers. > > > >At this point it's really hard for me to believe that anything > >*but* the list server is to blame for the delivery failures. > > > > > >Tom C mused: > > > > > >>Hi John, > >> > >>Yep, I understand. I thought this might at least help the PDML at large, > >>to > >>understand that missing e-mails are not the fault of our list server. > >> > >>I have to say that on hotmail, I get very little, if any SPAM. Probably > >>the > >>price I pay for missing posts. > >> > >>Tom C. > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >>>From: "John Francis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>Reply-To: [email protected] > >>>To: [email protected] > >>>Subject: Re: OT: Lost E-mails > >>>Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2005 23:27:08 -0500 (EST) > >>> > >>>Tom C mused: > >>> > >>> > >>>>There was an AP news article this morning in the paper (from 2-25-05). > >>>> > >>>> > >>>It > >>> > >>> > >>>>addressed the increasingly unreliable state of e-mail. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>Basically this says "Some ISPs are throwing away email". > >>> > >>>This isn't really news. Today the finger is being pointed at Verizon. > >>>Last time the focus was on AOL (although I believe they now claim to > >>>properly send delivery failure notifications). > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > > > > > > > > > > -- > I can understand why mankind hasn't given up war. > During a war you get to drive tanks through the sides of buildings > and shoot foreigners - two things that are usually frowned on during > peacetime. > --P.J. O'Rourke > >
