Great Circle Associates List-Managers
(March 2000)
 

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

Subject: Re: VERPs versus batched delivery
From: Joe Smith <Joe . Smith @ wcom . com>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2000 14:56:24 -0800
To: list-managers @ greatcircle . com
In-reply-to: <20000313040558.J14159@ma-1.rootsweb.com>; from twp@rootsweb.com on Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 04:05:58AM -0500
References: <20000313040558.J14159@ma-1.rootsweb.com>

On Mon, Mar 13, 2000 at 04:05:58AM -0500, Tim Pierce wrote:
> So I calculated this percentage for each of the thousand lists, then
> added them all together and took the average percentage.  The result
> was an average volume increase of 40%.

Have you considered doing both?  (Batch with an occasional VERP)

Do normal delivery in batched mode.  But every so often (such as once
a week), set a flag on the list so that the next message to that particular
list goes out with VERP enabled.  Do this on different days for different
lists.

Bad addresses may hang around for 7 days before the next VERP run, but
they will get caught eventually.

-- 
Joe Smith    MCI WorldCom, On-Net Design/Impl, Product Technical Support
UNIX and Tech Sup: TYMNET Network, Xstream Packet Services (Public X.25)
<Joe.Smith@wcom.com>      2560 N 1st St, MS-5046/746, San Jose, CA 95131
Voice: 408-533-6220 = vnet 854-6220    Fax: 408-533-6702 = vnet 854-6702



References:
Indexed By Date Previous: Use of a database with list server software
From: Alistair Formby <aformby@openworld.co.uk>
Next: Re: install MJ?
From: "Michael C. Berch" <mcb@postmodern.com>
Indexed By Thread Previous: Re: VERPs versus batched delivery
From: Russ Allbery <rra@stanford.edu>
Next: Re: VERPs versus batched delivery
From: "Roger Fajman" <RAF@CU.NIH.GOV>

Google
 
Search Internet Search www.greatcircle.com