Re: what is up with the PG mailing lists?

On Thu, Nov 01, 2007 at 04:30:13PM +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
> getting. Sure, SMTP should have latency. But a modern SMTP system
> shouldn't take hours to deliver an email.

This isn't automatically true, and is explicitly contradicted by the
relevant RFCs.  I think it shouldn't be the _habit_ on such systems,
but AFAICT it isn't.  

But "hours to deliver an email" is in fact totally reasonable on a
busy system.  I think good mail administrators aim for "in general,
minutes".  The problem here is the perception that it is too often
outside the "in general" assumption.  I think that perhaps it'd be
more useful in this discussion to archive, over (say) six months,
cases where you think the headers are showing unexplainable lag.  I
think there probably _is_ a problem, actually, but I haven't yet
written a procmail recipe to catch all pg-[list] mail that has any
header where the hop time was (say) over one hour.  _That_ is the
sort of catalogue we need.

A
-- 
Andrew Sullivan  | ajs@crankycanuck.ca
The fact that technology doesn't work is no bar to success in the marketplace.    --Philip Greenspun