From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Message-ID: <3EFAF25C.6030203@proweb.co.uk> From: matt User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3) Gecko/20030425 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu Subject: Re: [9fans] mail problems.. References: <20030626035341.15964.qmail@g.bio.cse.psu.edu> <010801c33bd3$cc87dca0$d2944251@insultant.net> In-Reply-To: <010801c33bd3$cc87dca0$d2944251@insultant.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Thu, 26 Jun 2003 14:17:16 +0100 Topicbox-Message-UUID: dd7ff18c-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025 boyd, rounin wrote: >>Sure. It works fine for much larger things, like DNS and AIM. It's just >>the right tool for this job. >> >> > >http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/31392.html > That seems to suggest that UDP works for billions of daily DNS requests. Sounds like a few thousand mail clients per server would be well with its capability. It might make you reconsider knowing that Hotmail / Passport / MSN Messenger offer that exact service. Messenger notifies you if you have any Hotmail mail arrive, if that isn't a proof of concept then I don't know what you would consider. If the Beast can make it work for Hotmail & Windows then surely using distributed computing should make it all the easier and less resource hungry. Sounds to me that this would be the sort of application for which the use of Secstore/Factotum is intended. Authenticating the sender will be mandated for communications with Government somewhere soon, be that tax returns or road tolls or something. Microsoft is already trying to get Passport as the de-facto : http://theregister.co.uk/content/archive/24938.html