On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Michael L Torrie wrote:
No IP is not "best effort." TCP/IP is, though.
I think either you or I is confused as to what "best effort" is.
As far as I can tell, "best effort protocols" are ones in which no
guarantees are made as to whether the data has been delivered or not.
I've googled and googled and everything I see lists IP as a best-effort
protocol, and TCP/IP as providing guaranteed services.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Best_effort_delivery
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TCP/IP#The_transport_layer
http://www.bellevuelinux.org/best_effort.html
http://www.erg.abdn.ac.uk/users/gorry/course/arq-pages/best-effort.html
I understand your point, however. And I counter it by saying that the
very problems that gray listing is striving to counter already cause
these types of problems. For example, spam and spam scanning already
cause large organizations to have slow e- mail delivery.
Well, sure, if greylisting causes a slowdown in email delivery speed but a
net increase in email delivery speed then obviously that gets rid of one
of the bad points of greylisting. I certainly can agree with that.
I was only addressing the attitude of "SMTP was never designed to be an
instant form of communication, it was never intended to be reliable, it's
simply a best-effort system, so it doesn't make any sense when Joe Q. User
complains that greylisting slows down his email delivery speeds."
Sounds like we may be in agreement :)
~ Ross
/*
PLUG: http://plug.org, #utah on irc.freenode.net
Unsubscribe: http://plug.org/mailman/options/plug
Don't fear the penguin.
*/
