From: Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>
To: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Message Hash: b6bf2c157269b258dbc239458219bcdd4089e67db4a804371b1e1707ca17f142
Message ID: <32E35EC9.2E6@sk.sympatico.ca>
Reply To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net>
UTC Datetime: 1997-01-20 10:36:20 UTC
Raw Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 02:36:20 -0800 (PST)
From: Toto <toto@sk.sympatico.ca>
Date: Mon, 20 Jan 1997 02:36:20 -0800 (PST)
To: Bill Frantz <frantz@netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Sandy and the Doc
In-Reply-To: <32E1BBD9.6A0C@gte.net>
Message-ID: <32E35EC9.2E6@sk.sympatico.ca>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Bill Frantz wrote:
> I hope if such a system is set up, people who use it will realize that
> email is not 100% reliable. Just because algebra.com sent mail to
> toad.com, doesn't mean that toad.com actually received it. A small
> fraction of a percent of these messages will be lost.
Are there any critereon established, yet, as to what type of content
will be necessary for a letter to get 'lost'?
Return to January 1997
Return to “winsock@rigel.cyberpass.net (WinSock Remailer)”