From: Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: e98c61a27f7155ae312f7b3b3afc019b36eb98caee45e0dc25332c23ddf8fdbc
Message ID: <9510030313.AA10680@sulphur.osf.org>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1995-10-03 03:14:02 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 2 Oct 95 20:14:02 PDT
From: Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>
Date: Mon, 2 Oct 95 20:14:02 PDT
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: Time Lag
Message-ID: <9510030313.AA10680@sulphur.osf.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Internet email is highly dynamic. Hosts can be up/down. Routers can
be up/down. Gateways can be up/down. Routing databases can be out of
date. Cables can be cut. Load averages can affect whether a host accepts
SMTP connections. And so on.
Sending one message and rigorously studying timestamps in the Received
lines and using that to draw conclusions about mail propagation is a
complete waste of time.
/r$
Return to October 1995
Return to “Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>”
1995-10-03 (Mon, 2 Oct 95 20:14:02 PDT) - Re: Time Lag - Rich Salz <rsalz@osf.org>