the 15 minute pop equation

Discussion in 'Windows Small Business Server' started by SuperGumby, Jan 13, 2004.

  1. SuperGumby

    SuperGumby Guest

    I just don't understand what the problem is. WHY do people wish to reduce
    the pop connector collection time?

    Well, actually, NO, that's not the question. The question is more like 'WHY
    do people put so much effort into reducing the pop connector retrieval
    interval?'. With maybe a corollary question of 'WHY is it so damned
    important?'.

    I was dealing with a company for tech support today, the guy emailed me some
    notes. As we receive via SMTP no POP connector delay was involved. While I
    was on the phone I heard him reading the email, he suggested he was
    forwarding it to me and I could hear him typing as he asked me to pause
    while I was giving him my email address, he then suggested 'you should get
    it soon' so I'm supposing he had actually hit the 'send' button at this
    time.

    I also called someone else for support yesterday and went through a similar
    scenario.

    Both emails were simple text messages. One arrived inside the 15 minutes,
    the other took 3 hours. One was from Trend Micro, the other was from
    Microsoft. This is the nature of internet email. An old quote about internet
    email suggests '90% gets delivered inside a few minutes, 5% takes a couple
    of days, 5% goes into the big pop box in the sky and no-one knows why.'

    I also receive via SMTP at home. If the girl next door emailed me I would
    receive it with minimal delay. If she expected me to get off my ass and
    knock on her door within 15 minutes she better be offering something better
    than dinner to fix her computer.

    I just don't understand what the frenzy is.

    On the other hand, there are very good reasons why after attempting POP
    collection once a short delay should occur before another pop collection is
    attempted. Many mail systems (and I'm probably talking *nix here,
    particularly *nix mail server farms) 'lock' the mailbox during delivery, if
    you attempt to access the mailbox before the lock is released it will error.
    The previous POP conversation can be complete but because the server is
    handling thousands of requests and also doing it's own housekeeping the
    mailbox may still be locked. I'm not sure but I think the lock exists to
    eradicate the chance of duplicate delivery.

    ie. (if the mailbox lock was not implemented)
    popconversation1 'HI, any new mail?'
    popconversation1 'Yep, sure is, 1*10MB message'
    popconversation1 'give it to me baby'
    Transfer starts
    popconversation2 'HI, any new mail?'
    popconversation2 'Yep, sure is, 1*10MB message'
    popconversation2 'give it to me baby'
    Transfer starts

    some time later more pop conversations get initiated and we've got more
    transfers of the same message which eventually may end. The client then has
    multiple copies of the same message which transferred slowly because they
    all happened at the same time,,, and gets rather confused what to do with
    them.

    Just my take on the issue. I must be 'in a mood'. IF your users DEMAND
    immediate reception of mail tell them the best you can do is a permanent IP
    and SMTP delivery, which may result in delays of several minutes to several
    days, but won't include an additional 14 minutes and 59 seconds.
     
    SuperGumby, Jan 13, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. SuperGumby

    Dave Furey Guest

    LOL
     
    Dave Furey, Jan 13, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. ....prompting yet another question: why even discuss the 15 minute interval
    with end users? If we all just set up SBS boxes and said "it will check
    your mail for you" and don't add "every 15 minutes" then nobody would be the
    wiser IMHO.

    It's not like most SBS servers have multiply-redundant load-balanced T3
    internet connections :) On a 56k modem it really doesn't matter how often
    you check your pop3 mailboxes - it takes ages to download the messages...

    James
     
    James Reather, Jan 13, 2004
    #3
  4. SuperGumby

    NoJags Neil Guest

    Hey, no problem. You want to see me in one of *my* moods.
    In the case of my company, the ISP originally sold the internet connection
    on the basis that email was "more or less instant". I remember the meeting
    (c.1996) clearly; I knew better but I kept my mouth shut because I *wanted*
    an internet connection. Of course, when it turned out that email wasn't
    instant, it fell on me to do something about it so we ended up running our
    own mailserver on a fixed IP address, which IMHO is stupid for a company of
    our size.
     
    NoJags Neil, Jan 13, 2004
    #4
  5. There is also the issue with the additional cost of the fixed Ip address,
    here in New Zealand it costs $30 a month for one. Believe it or not alot of
    business's don't wish to pay telecom this much extra. I just tell the
    client it checks every 15 minutes and they are fine with that.

    Just my two cents

    Daniel.
     
    Daniel Woodhouse, Jan 13, 2004
    #5
  6. My own question these days is "Why is *everything* so important?" It
    becomes very difficult to set priorities when you have 30-40 active clients
    and every little problem needs to be fixed immediately. Sometimes I feel
    like a drug pusher; I just have computer junkies instead of drug junkies.
     
    Andrew M. Saucci, Jr., Jan 14, 2004
    #6
  7. SuperGumby

    Javier Gomez Guest

    There is also the issue with the additional cost of the fixed Ip address,
    You don't need a fixed IP to host your own mail... just get a (free) dynamic
    DNS service to do the trick (i.e. www.dyndns.org). The only "bad thing"
    would be if your ISP is blocking port 25 inbound (which can also be
    solved... but this time requires some green).

    Cheers!
     
    Javier Gomez, Jan 14, 2004
    #7
  8. SuperGumby

    Javier Gomez Guest

    Of course, when it turned out that email wasn't
    I dunno about that being stupid...

    I have a server on my home hosting my own mail (with only one user + the
    dog). Is that so bad??? :)
     
    Javier Gomez, Jan 14, 2004
    #8
  9. SuperGumby

    NoJags Neil Guest

    If you know how to do that without making a pigs ear of it, and don't mind
    spending the time then it's fine. The reason that I believe it was stupid
    for a small company like ours was that I had to spend *a lot* of man-hours
    learning how to do it when I should have been doing other stuff, made lots
    of mistakes along the way, and still have to spend a lot of time
    maintaining it. Far better subbed-out imho.
     
    NoJags Neil, Jan 14, 2004
    #9
  10. yes I know where you are coming from. I was really annoyed one day...One of
    my clients has a 15 computer network. Since I put in the NT4 Server with
    Exchange 5.5 they have been running without a hitch for 2 years. One day I
    was there and the hub decided to lock up, it took me 10 minutes to get
    everything operational again. The way they were carrying on you would have
    thought the world was going to end! Gratitude for you!

    Daniel.
     
    Daniel Woodhouse, Jan 14, 2004
    #10
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.