Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP)
Here are my "givens": * Average users cannot, and will not, tolerate FTP * HTTP and FTP are more efficient than SMTP * New protocols (IM2000) might be nice, but we need interoperability * Attachments are usually MIME, with a few uuencoded ones now and then. Methinks that it's proxy time. Why not hack the popular MTAs so that they take attachments, spool them in a Web-accessible directory, then modify the message. Just like e-cards... ATTACHMENTS: 1. http://some.domain.tld/path/to/sample/file.jpg 2. http://another.place.tld/second-attachment.doc Go to the link, receive a warning that they must save the file after download, that it will be deleted after successful download. Or delete it after a few days. Or maybe users could manage their Web spool, deleting messages as they please. There are some details to work out, but is the "FTP upload" not a task that we could automatically perform for users? Eddy --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. EverQuick Internet Division Phone: (316) 794-8922 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
On Fri, 25 May 2001 15:49:54 BST, "E.B. Dreger" <eddy+public+spam@noc.everquick.net> said:
Methinks that it's proxy time. Why not hack the popular MTAs so that they take attachments, spool them in a Web-accessible directory, then modify the message.
Just like e-cards...
message/external-body was first described in RFC1341, in June 1992. Hardly a new idea... /Valdis
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 12:59:01 -0400 From: Valdis.Kletnieks@vt.edu
message/external-body was first described in RFC1341, in June 1992.
I was not aware of that.
Hardly a new idea...
Not a new idea, but where are the implementations? :-) That said, I have another RFC that I must read. Eddy --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brotsman & Dreger, Inc. EverQuick Internet Division Phone: (316) 794-8922 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 21 May 2001 11:23:58 +0000 (GMT) From: A Trap <blacklist@brics.com> To: blacklist@brics.com Subject: Please ignore this portion of my mail signature. These last few lines are a trap for address-harvesting spambots. Do NOT send mail to <blacklist@brics.com>, or you are likely to be blocked.
On Fri, 25 May 2001, E.B. Dreger wrote:
Methinks that it's proxy time. Why not hack the popular MTAs so that they take attachments, spool them in a Web-accessible directory, then modify the message.
Just like e-cards...
ATTACHMENTS:
1. http://some.domain.tld/path/to/sample/file.jpg 2. http://another.place.tld/second-attachment.doc
Go to the link, receive a warning that they must save the file after download, that it will be deleted after successful download. Or delete it after a few days. Or maybe users could manage their Web spool, deleting messages as they please.
There are some details to work out, but is the "FTP upload" not a task that we could automatically perform for users?
This is actually one of the more constructive comments in the (off-topic for nanog) thread. I don't email is the correct vehicle for large documents (size > 1M), but getting the public to do the correct-but-more-difficult thing is a losing battle. If ISPs took it upon themselves to convert attachments to http/ftp on-the-fly and transparently to users you would have a sol'n that should work for everyone. Authentication could easily be added via MD5 checksums (ala ezmlm) and encription could even be added via https. For those of us that want to change the world, it's much easier to take action and change the system then to try and convert all the users. Matt __________________________ http://www.invision.net/ _______________________ Matthew E. Martini, PE InVision.com, Inc. (631) 543-1000 x104 Chief Technology Officer matt@invision.net (631) 864-8896 Fax _______________________________________________________________________pgp_
[ On Saturday, May 26, 2001 at 11:51:39 (-0400), Matt Martini wrote: ]
Subject: Re: Possible solution? (e-mail parcel vs. FTP)
If ISPs took it upon themselves to convert attachments to http/ftp on-the-fly and transparently to users you would have a sol'n that should work for everyone.
It's not the ISP's duty to solve the problem -- just to force the solution. ISPs need only reduce the maximum message size to "what even an extraordinary human could type in one sitting" and the rest of the software world will respond with multitudes of solutions in the MUA. After all the main part of the solution can only realistically be implemented in the MUA. The ISP need only provide the HTTP (or FTP) server in addition to the incentive.
For those of us that want to change the world, it's much easier to take action and change the system then to try and convert all the users.
Exactly! Note too that we can hope that most of the idiots who like to send huge e-mail messages will also be enthralled by small devices like PDAs and maybe this will help reduce the problem a bit. -- Greg A. Woods +1 416 218-0098 VE3TCP <gwoods@acm.org> <woods@robohack.ca> Planix, Inc. <woods@planix.com>; Secrets of the Weird <woods@weird.com>
On Fri, 25 May 2001, E.B. Dreger wrote: Hi,
Methinks that it's proxy time. Why not hack the popular MTAs so that they take attachments, spool them in a Web-accessible directory, then modify the message.
I've given some thinking to this subject, however I thought of the following objections: - users do no longer have it under control (ie don't have the choice to mail/put on web) anymore; - confidential information *could* be stored unwantingly lang online on the other side, it might be a good solution to give the cluefull users a choice: ie with an extra header: X-No-Attachment-Stealing: yes or something like that. -- /* Sabri Berisha CCNA,BOFH,+iO O.O speaking for just myself * Join HAL!!: www.HAL2001.org ____oOo_U_oOo____ http://www.bit.nl/~sabri * For the exceedingly thick-headed, experience is the only way to learn. * Sam Thomas - NANOG */
participants (5)
-
E.B. Dreger -
Matt Martini -
Sabri Berisha -
Valdis.Kletnieks＠vt.edu -
woods＠weird.com