Various people are alleged to have said things like:
[ snip ]
Business Response:
[ snip ]
the problem with large file transfer via email is that it takes up more space than the actual file (it's usually encoded in some manner which makes it grow by a factor of somewhere from 1.2 to 1.4), and there's no guarantee that the sender will do anything about it. the use of ftp or scp to retrieve files requires active involvement and encourages the recipient to do something with the file. it's a simple matter of a synchronous system compared to an asynchronous one. my personal view is that email messages should not exceed one megabyte in size. anything larger is (imo) silly.
I rather like DJB's IM2000 initiative:
hmm...sounds like pop-without-smtp, except it needs smtp to send the notifications. i guess i could spam notifications to someone and end in the same pickle i'm in now wrt to spam.
Why not send the header with some "magic authentication cookie" to the receiver, who may then yank the file from sender-side spool using HTTP or some other protocol that's more efficient than uu- or mime-encoded SMTP?
like this? Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-bogdanov-comments-umsp-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" that and a small perl script are how i get all the internet drafts and rfcs as they are published. -- |-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----| codewarrior@daemon.org * "ah! i see you have the internet twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!" andrew@crossbar.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."