Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(October 1995)
 

Indexed By Date: [Previous] [Next] Indexed By Thread: [Previous] [Next]

Subject: Re: Full mailboxes
From: Ken Dykes <kgdykes @ Thinkage . On . CA>
Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 23:40:26 -0400
To: list-managers @ greatcircle . com

>From: PMDAtropos@aol.com
>Date: Mon, 9 Oct 1995 20:43:32 -0400
>Subject: Re: Full mailboxes
>
>In a message dated 95-10-08 03:03:06 EDT, henrym@sacto.mp.usbr.gov (Henry W.
>Miller) writes:
>>sure about CIS, though.  I run several lists, and frequently get
>>messages bounced back from AOL and CIS stating that the user's
>>mailbox is full and to try again later.  Why?  It occurs to me
>>that both providers have gigabytes, maybe terabytes of disk storage.
>>To bounce mail back to the sender is really uncalled for.  Surely there
>>has to be a better way to deal with this.

>Each AOL member is permitted 550 pieces of mail on our mail host at any given
>time. At five screen names per account, 3.5 million accounts, that's as many
>...
>All in all, I'd think that up to 550MB of mail (inbound mail can be up to 1MB
>in size), at 550 pieces, is pretty reasonable. AOL members can easily
>download their entire mailbox contents using FlashSessions, freeing up space
>on the AOL host system. Likewise, with 5 screen names per account, they can
>easily divvy their mail load up into multiple screen names. IMO, if a
>member's mailbox fills up it's their responsibility (and it demonstrates to
>me as a list owner an unwillingness to commit to my lists. They get removed).

i have had AOL subsscribers who *DO* retreive their mail regularly.  But they
simply get so much of it they get full mailboxes in very short time.

ie: full mailbox is a *transient* problem

why dont service providers with mailbox limits return a RETRYABLE transient
(resource unavailable?) error to my smtp so that *i* may queue/retry for
a couple days?
the brutal delivery failure is uncalled for in my opinion too.

if the provider is no longer connected to my smtp (ie: the message has been
wandering around internal machines before determining the full mailbox status)
why dont they set up a buffer-machine which will do the queue/retry for
a day or two?  this helps us, and still essentially limits stale-mail
piling up on users who never seem to sign-on or gone on vacation.

   - Ken Dykes, Thinkage Ltd., Kitchener, Ontario, Canada    [43.40N 80.48W]
         kgdykes@thinkage.on.ca            postmaster@thinkage.com 


Follow-Ups:
Indexed By Date Previous: Re: Full mailboxes
From: PMDAtropos@aol.com
Next: Re: Full mailboxes
From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: Full mailboxes
From: Adam Horwitz <adam@tripcom.com>
Next: Re: Full mailboxes
From: Keith Moore <moore@cs.utk.edu>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com