Load Balancing with Postfix [and SpamAssassin]

Josh Coates jcoates at archive.org
Fri Jan 20 06:49:35 MST 2006


> As we're constantly reminding our users, E-mail is, and never was 
> designed to be, an instant form of communication.  

who says?

electrons move pdq, and i don't think it was ever designed to be
"non-instant".  if you have the time or inclination to provide any original
sources on the intentions of the designers, it'd be interesting to see if
they go out of their way to say in the original spec "oh, by our design, it
might take hours for you to get your email, so don't count on it being
instant."

> Nor is it intended 
> to be reliable, although it will try and try for days.

in that same vein, i don't think the original designers of email thought
"hey, let's not make this reliable."
  
by common usage of the term reliable, email *is* reliable, and it many cases
it's more reliable than the phone service or postal mail.  however, by
strict definition, it is not - but then again, what form of communication is
reliable by the strict definition? 

to tell users "sorry, my email server is configured to aggressively kill
'spam' and have multi-hour delays on suspected spam, and i can't help it if
you didn't realize that email was designed to never really be an instant,
reliable form of communication, tough beans" is kind of bogus and lame imho.
:-/

i'm not an email-original-designer-intention-historian, so please correct me
if i'm mistaken.

-josh 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: plug-bounces at plug.org [mailto:plug-bounces at plug.org] On 
> Behalf Of Lonnie Olson
> Sent: Thursday, January 19, 2006 4:17 PM
> To: Provo Linux Users Group Mailing List
> Subject: Re: Load Balancing with Postfix [and SpamAssassin]
> 
> Michael L Torrie wrote:
> > As we're constantly reminding our users, E-mail is, and never was 
> > designed to be, an instant form of communication.  Nor is 
> it intended 
> > to be reliable, although it will try and try for days.  If 
> you need to 
> > get in touch with someone urgently, you should use a medium that is 
> > designed for that, such as a voice call.
> 
> I agree completely.  However, this doesn't seem to be the 
> consensus among those that don't know better.  Both me and my 
> tech support have fielded a great many of angry complaints 
> when an email is delayed even by an hour.
> 
> We try explaining their error in judgment, but when you 
> provide mail services for the masses, you can't afford to 
> implement greylisting widely.
> 
> --lonnie
> 




More information about the PLUG mailing list