On 12/02/2021 14:31, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 14:26:40 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 12/02/2021 11:21, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 12 Feb 2021 10:29:49 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 12/02/2021 08:50, Tim Lamb wrote:
[quoted text muted]
A brief education on email transport.

Start with it being inherently unreliable

Actually it isn't.

You left the explanation off.

Its the anti-spam that has made it so

Not really. It was unreliable from the first RFC. Way before the unwashed
got their mitts on it.

No, it wasn't. It offered no guarantees, but the way it was implemented
(which is nothing to do with the RFCS) made it inherently reliable. Any
sendmail instance would store and forward. If it couldn't forward, it
would bounce.

Other so called 'guaranteed' protocols exhibited the opposite problem.
The lack of a guarantee of delivery was as likely to be a fault on the
return trip as the forward.



--
€œThe fundamental cause of the trouble in the modern world today is that
the stupid are cocksure while the intelligent are full of doubt."

- Bertrand Russell