At 09:06 AM 8/27/97 -0600, Jerry J Bromenshenk wrote:
 
>Binary attachments choke lots of e-mail systems.  There would be no
>problem if everyone used the same computer platform, operating system, and
>mail software.
 
How true, how sad.. I have several Internet connections and one of them is
100% UNIX to unix which can transmit binary but it is a chore to decode them.
 
But it is sad that in this day of high graphics more binary files are not
used in at least the NEWS groups. At one time there was good reason not to
allow them but these conditions no longer exist and tens of thousands sex
pictures are sent through the NEWS group servers each day with no problem.
The problem is more the cost to the Internet provider in housing the
29,000+- news groups that now are around.
 
List mailers are a little different and since they are set up to provide
for the fast easy flow of mail from and to those with the lowest common
connection  using the e-mail channels they have reason to not encourage
binary files if for no other reason then protecting the user or provider
with the lowest common system. Technically there no longer is any reason
for this but the smoke comes not from the providers but those who use the
system and many of these have not the advantage of low cost unlimited
Internet connections, that too is changing, but if it will ever bee 100% is
anyone's guess.
 
 
>Unfortunately, each platform and operating system uses its
>own approach to handling (coding, unencoding, etc.) binary files.  Thus,
>if there is a mismatch, the receiver's system may choke or freeze.  In
>general, binary files sent in a mime format tend to cause fewer problems.
>ASCII (text) files rarely cause any problems.
 
It is true that each has his own hardware, but the software must meet the
same standards set up by different committees, so all have the same
standards when it comes to the actual material that moves between two
points via the net. It is the end user who has the problem, and being one
that would rather do it all in DOS I feel for all.
 
>Also, systems using a shared server may run out of disk space - our
>university system has several thousand users.  A chain mail message or
>large influx of attachments on a given day will exceed the temporary
>storage space.  In that case, all mail dumps, never to be seen again.
 
Individual hardware problems should not be reason to regulate the Internet.
Any system that will crash from lack of disk space will crash, and all
systems
do crash including the biggest on the Internet backbone. A direct
connection to a Internet provider is cheep insurance,(20$ most areas USA
for unlimited personal use)
 
>If you only get a few e-mail messages per day, the occassional attachment
>usually is not a problem.
 
I wish this was so simple as I love to slip in a binary once en a while and
I do, but those who use LIST mail or NEWS groups for attachments or
binaries will find that their e-mail will increase with the "official
warning's" of the net violations and if they continue will find their
provider will drop their account. It boils my blood as a end user to have
all this visual power in my PC and not be able to use it, but as a system
operator I also know some of the why's. We are just behind the technology
curve when it comes to e-mail use by LIST's and NEWS groups. A NEWS group
could be set up for beekeeping binaries, and could be used for text
messages also. There are also several miscellaneous binary NEWS groups that
could be used by beekeepers. The problem always cuts to the end user and
how many of them can or would use such a NEWS group.
 
I MHO, ttul Andy-