[ILUG] email as file transfer

[Proinnsias Breathnach]

On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 02:29:09PM +0100, Stephen Reilly wrote:
> I would prefer if when large files were being sent that it became a
> pull rather than push mechanism. As an email recipient I would rather
> have the choice whether or not to receive such a file. Of course the
> easy way for me to do this is to use a web based mail client :) Email
> can often form quite an important role in an organisation's
> communications. Therefore having it slowed dramatically or in extreme
> cases rendered unusable because someone attached a large file to a
> mail is not acceptable. On the other hand most employees with email
> access will have the ability and knowledge to attach files to their
> mails. This makes it currently the easiest method for a non technical
> user to transfer files, nobody is disputing that fact. 

AGH paragraphs .. please !!

There *is* an easy solution - it's called Quotas

User gets 100MB of storage space, to include sent items. Email
sending/recieving ability is restricted after that threshold is reached.
It works !

> Unfortunately
> in my own experience on a standard corporate network email attachments
> form a large portion of network traffic. If left unchecked this could
> greatly increase necessary expenditure on infrastructure to support
> such a resource. Large file attachments are a bad thing from the
> network's point of view.

Um, no, Large attachments are, from the networks' PoV the same as any
other large transfer. Internally - a doddle on modern networks.
Externally, not so hot, but hey - quotas work.

If an internal network is so badly designed that the occasional massive
email/attachment causes problems, there are bigger problems. Most of us
in here have access to a KX web-based file exchange thingy - it sucks
big hairy ones (to paraphrase valen), I still get a dozen 3MB or bigger
screenshots per day, and I need to !

> In that sense every other possible method of
> transferring large files, except the extremes that I'm sure someone is
> currently racking their brains to come up with ;), is preferable. Even
> to the point of burning a cd and posting it. The network
> provider/maintainer must decide based on analysis of his/her network
> what size restrictions to apply to email attachments because they are
> and will remain a necessary evil. It may be that they can support
> email attachments over 100Mbs in which case more power to them.

Come on ... 10mbit half duplex can handle 100MB fairly easily, and we
host a few hundred users on a 45mbit connection with no issues, massive
attachments and all ... it's not a big deal any more in the real world.
At home it's another matter - but hey, if you will expect to
send/recieve your digital photos by email ...


P