linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] send-email: supply a --send-delay=1 by default

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <xmqqpo3rehe4.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
Date:   Sun, 25 Mar 2018 18:48:35 -0700
From:   Junio C Hamano <gitster@...ox.com>
To:     "brian m. carlson" <sandals@...stytoothpaste.net>
Cc:     Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason <avarab@...il.com>,
        git@...r.kernel.org,
        Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] send-email: supply a --send-delay=1 by default

"brian m. carlson" <sandals@...stytoothpaste.net> writes:

> I'm not sure that this is going to have the effect you want it to have.
> Let me give an example to demonstrate why.
> ...
> In short, I don't think this is going to be especially helpful because
> it won't change the status quo for a lot of senders.  You'd have to
> insert some significant delay in order to get the effect you desire, and
> even then things could still be delivered out of order.

Thanks for explaining it clearly.

In the past on this list those who do not get the store-and-forward
nature of e-mail transport have brought this up a few times, but
this approach fundamentally do not work, at least for the purpose of
forcing ordering of messages at the receiving end.