Re: Using local MTA re: tlug: Naive VM question

[Jonathan Byrne - 3Web <jq@example.com>]

On Tue, 5 May 1998, Kei Furuuchi wrote:

> Jonathan Byrne writes:
>  > Umm, I don't exactly follow how this differs from using an ordinary mail
>  > client such as Netscape Mail or Eudora on any other machine.  For
> 
> I don't have to be conscious about dialing, so do the applications.
> The applications don't have to have fuctions like "send it later"
> because it is not online now. So those functions are not sales point

So you mean that you have your system setup to automatically make a
connection and mail run during Telehodai time and you keep all of the mail
on your local mail spool until then?  Or am I completely missing what you
mean?  Under a setup like that, mail that you wrote at 9:00 AM wouldn't go
out until 14 hours later.  I think I'd rather spend the 10 yen to call my
ISP and dump my outgoing mail :-)

Speaking as an ISP employee, I can say that this is what our members tend
to do, rather than waiting until Telehodai time to send mail.  They surf
during Telehodai, but doing a mail run is apparently widely seen as being
worth 10 or 20 yen.

> I think this applies to netday.
> The government is eager to get schools online connected by t1.
> But, is it necessary? I say just set up private network in school that 
> connects to the internet at night taking care of e-mails and
> publishing webs but at daytime offers dial-up connection to PTA using
> one public telephone. In this way the problems like infrastructure or
> decency are solved.  

So the school shouldn't have its own server on the Internet, but instead
should run on
dial-up access all day, and the web page updates, etc., would only be
uploaded to a remote web server overnight by an automated routine?  I
think few users would find this to be an acceptable solution, and you
would need to use a 128K ISDN dial-up to get anything like acceptable
performance.  That connection would most likely be open all day long, and
the cost of that is actually much greater than the cost of a 128K leased
line.

> PC98 spec. has nothing to do with NEC PC98 product line, which is
> eventually given up. For NEC, it is confusing name to sell. Obviously
> NEC has no say about naming.

OK, got it :-)  Yeah, the choice of PC98 for the specification name was
rather unfortunate.  I guess they'll just have to ask us before they name
it next time *-)


Jonathan Byrne
Media and Content Section
3Web - Your Internet Solution! <URL:http://www.threeweb.ad.jp/>