[geeks] nerd reading for a Friday night ... old-skool waxed

[Phil Stracchino]

der Mouse wrote:
>> UUCP was efficient because it operated on compressed batches.
> 
>> Almost all other protocols are very inefficient.

>> I don't see why they don't implement compressed batch SMTP.
> 
> Because the resources whose use it would improve are not worth
> improving (or at least are not generally seen that way), as compared to
> the downsides it would bring.

Looked at QMQP?


-- 
 It's not the years, it's the mileage.
 Phil Stracchino              phil.stracchino at speakeasy.net
 Renaissance Man, Unix generalist, Perl hacker, Free Stater
 Landline: 603-429-0220                Mobile: 603-320-5438