-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Mark,
On 13 August 2000 at 12:07:35 GMT +0100 (which was 12:07 where I
live) [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote and made these points on the subject
of "Replies arrive before originals (was:Re: Strange error message when sending)":
MRH> ... my assumption from examining headers in the past is that some
MRH> ISPs servers are overloaded on occasion and take a while to
MRH> distribute email.
Correct.
MRH> For interests sake - this message is sent from home (via my
MRH> server, the ISP relay and outwards...) so it'll be interesting to
MRH> see whether there are problems in timing with this message too?
MRH> Received: from ................ by silverstones.com [127.0.0.1]
MRH> with DomainPOP (MDaemon.v3.5.0c.R)
MRH> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 13 Aug 2000 12:22:08 +0100
That took ten minutes to arrive ... but that's an issue of when I
picked up my domain mail from the relay server.
MRH> Received: from dutaint.com by .......................
MRH> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 13 Aug 2000 18:12:27 +0700
This is some four minutes after it left the originating server ... I
am surprised it took that long!
MRH> Received: from bart.callnet0800.com by dutaint.com
MRH> with SMTP (MDaemon.v3.5.0c.R)
MRH> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 13 Aug 2000 18:08:07 +0700
Well, someone's clock is wrong! This went back in time by 17 seconds
:-).
MRH> Received: from smtp.callnet0800.com [212.67.128.145] by bart.callnet0800.com with
ESMTP
MRH> (SMTPD32-5.05) id A1FE5FEF0140; Sun, 13 Aug 2000 12:09:50 +0100
Two minutes and twenty second after it was received (but I think that
bart.callnet0800.com has its' clock set slightly fast).
MRH> Received: from mango.callnet0800.com [212.67.144.19] by smtp.callnet0800.com
MRH> (SMTPD32-5.05) id A17A1222021E; Sun, 13 Aug 2000 12:07:38 +0100
This transit took only two seconds.
MRH> Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1])
MRH> by mango.callnet0800.com (MERAK 2.10.290) with ESMTP id FE65DCF0
MRH> for <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sun, 13 Aug 2000 12:07:36 +0100
And this one only one second from the time of creation.
MRH> Date: Sun, 13 Aug 2000 12:07:35 +0100
In truth, time difference in seconds can't be really be relied upon. I
once saw someone sneering at PC clock synchronizers on this list but,
IMHO, such things are a necessity for clarity and to ensure that we
are all talking the same language. I use one which runs on the main
comms machine here on my LAN and knows how to get the current real
time from a time server. It will do this at one minute intervals while
I am connected to an ISP and I dial out at least every 15 minutes.
This software also provides time server services for the LAN and all
other machines here look to it for an update at around 30 minute
intervals. A PC clock will drift by a few seconds every day. The
practices I observe here mean that no PC in the house is out by more
than a second at any time (except in the case of prolonged dial-out
failure).
- --
Cheers,
.\\arck
Marck D. Pearlstone, Consultant Software Engineer
Moderator TBUDL / TBBETA
www: http://www.silverstones.com
PGP key: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=GET%20MARCKKEY>
*-----------------------------------------------
| Using The Bat! 1.46 Beta/3 S/N 14F4B4B2
| under Windows 98 4.10 Build 1998
*-----------------------------------------------
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 6.0.2i
iQA/AwUBOZaKnznkJKuSnc2gEQJskACcDZBj5xIEAVbHwGd4V3YKOJevXiwAn3k2
H4D9ZvCvWT8U2a7uqVQ6AZwT
=O0Wm
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
--------------------------------------------------------------
View the TBUDL archive at http://tbudl.thebat.dutaint.com
To send a message to the list moderation team double click here:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To Unsubscribe from TBUDL, double click here and send the message:
<mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--------------------------------------------------------------
You are subscribed as : [email protected]
