| Sun 97-10-12 Michael Stone <mstone(_at_)itri(_dot_)loyola(_dot_)edu>
| > | Sat 97-10-11 "Mike A. Harris"
[bandwidth limitation is diminishing problem: fiber cables, ATM ...]
| But the interchanges are close to overloaded in several key areas.
| (Witness the recent problems in mae-east, for example.) Gratuitously
| wasting bandwidth is really hard to justify.
I don't know who wastes band, but it is not the standard's like MIME fault,
which is good thing. An individual may waste band: one has a choice
of sending big file as mime x-gzip or as plain file 100K. Html files
are not essentially different from any other files.
[html and MUA]
| But how much better is it to recieve
| "<b>Yes</b>, I <i>want to</i> come to the party."
| instead of
| "Yes, I want to come to the party."
| Especially when you send the same message twice, once in each format.
| There isn't much traffic going through mailing lists that actually
| _needs_ html markup tags.
I agree that seeing HTML in places where it is not desired, like in
mailing lists, is not appropriate. Still, a good MUA would have
displayed the text as instructed and you wouldn't be annoyed by the
I know, I know, the MUA's are not up to MIME yet. I use Emacs and
that's basicly text based (in this regard XEmacs is much better), so
I do see the html. (it depends on my login, I also have automatic
html2text filter before I look at the message, so I actually don't see
any funny WORD6 or HTML or MS-NOTES markup..)
[PGP is desired, there is also X-pgp]
| Hmm. So it's good for everyone to use a different signature standard?
There is only one. The PGP. And X-pgp just dis/assembles PGP sig to/from
email headers, so that it's not one's way in the message.
| Especially the RSA format that netscape is using, that takes a 1 or 2 line
| message and turns it into a 1 or 2 _k_ message.
Huh! that sounds bad indeed.
| Also, what's the advantage of x-pgp over rfc2015?
The existence of X-pgp is described in the doc I referred to. You'll
find reference for rfc2015 too.