[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Waste of bandwidth? (Was: Let the header name be "Location:")
- To: info-ietf-smtp@xxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Waste of bandwidth? (Was: Let the header name be "Location:")
- From: Bill Wohler <wohler@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 20 Nov 1995 22:30:56 GMT
- Newsgroups: info.ietf.smtp
- Organization: a2i network
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Reply-to: Bill Wohler <wohler@xxxxxxxx>
email@example.com (Dave Crocker) writes:
>>The only thing that the above section accomplishes is waste bytes.
> Roy! We're talking about RFC822 and MIME, here. The byte-counting
>war got lost 20 years ago. Honest.
Just curious--is this a common view? Also, do you eschew
byte-counting everywhere or do you differentiate between useful
and frivolous header fields?
What about signatures? PGP signatures are beginning to make the wasted
space by extra header fields pale in comparison.
With the explosive growth of the Internet, byte-counting in the
small will yield large rewards in the large.
While HTTP traffic dwarfs SMTP traffic on the Internet, don't forget
about UUCP and other networks that are still dominated by email
Bill Wohler <firstname.lastname@example.org> ph: +1-415-854-1857 fax: +1-415-854-3195
Say it with MIME. Maintainer of comp.mail.mh and news.software.nn FAQs.
If you're passed on the right, you're in the wrong lane.