True. However, it's not arbitrary if the ISP says I'm not going to provide store and forward services for email over 100k (although I usually use 1Meg as the cutoff). If you want to do something different in your office or pay for the resources to host some sort of multi-terrabyte mailserver and the bandwidth to handle all the retries, latent failures, etc., go for it. Personally, I choose not to accept the headaches for users that don't know how to use computers. While "Parcel Post" is arguably valid, there are better methods of achieving the desired result that are much more net-friendly, user-polite, and efficient. To further your analogy, parcel post generally accepts packages up to 50#, nothing more. This is approximately 800 times the weight of a standard letter. (50 pounds == 800 ounces, and first class letter pricing is based on one ounce increments). A standard email message is usually less than 32k. 800 times 32k is 25600k, or about 25 Megabytes. Therefore, using your analogy, it is reasonable to limit parcel post to 25 Megs. This is giving you substantial bennefit of the doubt here, as the largest non-attachment email I could find in my inbox was about 10k (making the parallel limit more like 8 Megs). Denying other users resources on a store-and-forward system you don't own by sending large attachments is, in and of itself, arguably a denial of service attack. Owen
Arbitrarily denying the use of email for file transfer is, in and of itself, tortuous interference with legitimate business of others. - James R. Cutler - EDS 800 Tower Drive, Troy, MI 48098 1 248 265 7514 james.cutler@eds.com
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 09:29:00AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
To further your analogy, parcel post generally accepts packages up to 50#, nothing more. This is approximately 800 times the weight of a standard letter. (50 pounds == 800 ounces, and first class letter pricing is based on one ounce increments).
And remember, people don't complain because the local postal system won't deliver the 150lb anvil that your great-great-great grandpa had dropped on his head during the civil war. They would also feel bad if they later found out the the postal worker who had to take the package out of the postal drop got a hernia from having to take the package out, and because of their package not only could other people not mail letters, but the letters that were waiting to be mailed got ruined.
On Fri, May 25, 2001 at 09:29:00AM -0700, Owen DeLong wrote:
To further your analogy, parcel post generally accepts packages up to 50#, nothing more. This is approximately 800 times the weight of a standard letter. (50 pounds == 800 ounces, and first class letter pricing is based on one ounce increments).
A standard email message is usually less than 32k. 800 times 32k is 25600k, or about 25 Megabytes. Therefore, using your analogy, it is reasonable to limit parcel post to 25 Megs. This is giving you substantial bennefit of the doubt here, as the largest non-attachment email I could find in my inbox was about 10k (making the parallel limit more like 8 Megs).
Denying other users resources on a store-and-forward system you don't own by sending large attachments is, in and of itself, arguably a denial of service attack.
If we are going to compare, does this mean we should start charging extra for these large messages? If we continue this comparison, a nomral letter is $0.34 for up to 1 oz. Say a 'normal' attachment (Picture, whatnot) is 1 pound; not heavy, not small enough to just be a letter. It would be $3.45 to send it. That would be 16 times. Now, following your 800x theory, that would be 50 pounds. To send a 50 pound parcel post would be $36.81. A roughly 1000fold increase. If we assume, say, a penny per mail (Most of us, of course, bundling the first, say, 1000 free), to send that 25 MB attachment would cost $10.00. Would this, then, be considered fair? After all, the post office doesn't just pick up and deliver our mail, we pay them to do so, on a scale according to the size, weight, and distance of it. By this logic, we should be able to do the same and it would be perfectly OK. (OK, this may be a bit chaotic and disjointed. I've given up caffeine recently and am a bit skittish for it. :) My point, basically, is that comparing email to the real post office is not a fair comparison unless we are ready to take on the full burden. Part of that is to look at each email and consider it in relation to all the others, and charge the people sending mail according to the resources used. Personally, I don't think email is an appropriate way to transfer files. However, I know I am in the minority there, and as such, do not feel the need to lean on other people to make them stop. I just make sure they know that sending it to .me. isn't an acceptable method of document transfer. I have known ISPs who limit, and known ISPs that don't. Now, what does this have to do with NANOG? Is there a reason to discuss this here? Is the conversation going to go anywhere other than to more bickering, and spawn off another off-topic thread in a few days about the merits of embedded multimedia in HTML pages? No? Then let's drop it. Noone is going to convert anyone else to their religion, and that is fine. But this thread has gotten way, way out of hand, and for one that started off-topic, has gotten to the 'gross' stage. Let us drop this, go have a good weekend, and pick up Tuesday with a good thread about the merits of IS-IS vs. OSPF or something. Jamie
participants (3)
-
Jamie Norwood -
owen＠dixon.delong.sj.ca.us -
Saint skullY the Dazed