On Fri, 9 Mar 2001, Philip Hazel wrote:
> > ``I can
> > understand "not support anything but failure or delay"''.
>
> That, of course, cuts out most of the point of "full" DSN, as I see it.
> People who advocate it are the people who "want to be told when my
> message is delivered".
That is the issue for me. The other aspects of DSN are mostly harmless.
But it is the general use for checking that a message has been delivered
that I find objectionable.
(1) First, it will never be reliable, due to difficulty in defining
"delivery", and for non-uniform implementation. There will be
far too many false positives and false negatives.
(2) If it is not highly relieble (see (1)) it is quiet probably worse
than useless.
(3) It can nearly double the number of messages transmitted, while
being useless in terms of informativeness.
-j
--
Jeffrey Goldberg
I have recently moved, see
http://www.goldmark.org/jeff/contact.html
Relativism is the triumph of authority over truth, convention over justice
