Re: [EFM] Re: May we please eliminate file attachments from this reflector?-Re: VirusAlert
In the interest of saving bits and lessening the virus threat, what if the reflector would refuse any attachments that aren't zipfiles? This would allow legitimate posters to send a compressed attachment, while also fighting off most virus attacks.
"O'Mahony, Barry" wrote:
> I'd like to support this position.
> Looking over the past several months activity on the EFM reflector, the
> percentage of messages with attachments is very small. And despite the
> recent spate of viruses (which the IEEE reflector dealt with), the vast
> majority of them have been relevent to the work of 802.3ah. Typically, they
> are not very large, and are things like minutes of conference calls,
> strawman (logo-less) presentation proposals, etc. It would impede the work
> of the group to lose them. And it does not appear that there is any other
> mechanism available: does 802.3ah have a web site where anyone can post
> material, anytime? It appears not. So someone wishing to do this would
> need to devise their own, outside of any corporate firewalls.
> One can always do dialup downloads while at dinner. For me, the biggest
> problem I have is the marketing guy that send me the 10 Meg presentation
> while I'm on the road, not the 802.3ah reflectors.
> Barry O'Mahony
> Intel Labs
> Hillsboro, OR, USA
> tel: +1 (503) 264-8579
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Howard Frazier [mailto:millardo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Friday, May 17, 2002 10:03 AM
> To: firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com
> Subject: [EFM] Re: May we please eliminate file attachments from this
> reflector?-Re: VirusAlert
> As one who travels frequently, thus having to put up with dial up
> access to a POP3 server, and one who can't afford the LUXURY of being
> able to filter or delete messages which contain attachments, I
> have some sympathy for those who are similarly burdened. For this
> reason, the stds-802-3-efm reflector imposes a limit of 250,000
> characters per message, which bounces very long attachments to
> the list administrator. If you have any familiarity with PDF
> distillers, and you eliminate wasteful things like fancy corporate
> logos and useless background patterns, it is easy to constrain
> PDF files to this limit. Believe it or not, the principal reason
> for PDF file size bloat is the corporate logo which appears on
> so many presentation templates.
> That said, I also agree with Frank's point. The free exchange of
> information is essential to our process, and email is just too good
> of a medium for information distribution. So, I offer the following
> 1) Be mindful of file size. Eliminate ridiculous background fill
> patterns from your slides (monochrome backgrounds usually do not
> cause problems, but gradient fills do). Eliminate logos which blow
> up files. If you must use a logo (understandable) choose one
> that compresses well. Your corporate marcom department can help
> if you ask them. Choose your PDF distiller options carefully, and
> use a high compression (lower quality) setting.
> 2) Most importantly, check your file size before you fire
> off a message. If the size exceeds a quarter meg, you have done
> something wrong.
> 3) Use a compression utility like PKzip to compact large files. You
> might be surprised at how effective this is, but it shouldn't be
> a surprise since the bloat is caused by redundant information which
> compresses quite nicely, thank you. The unzip utillities are
> freeware, and should not represent a barrier to the message recipients.
> 4) If all else fails, email a link to your material, rather than
> emailing the file itself.
> I realize that this sounds like a burden, and I don't want to discourage
> the distribution of important material. Please realize that the few
> minutes you spend following the steps above will save alot of time for
> the thousands (!) of people on these reflectors.
> Howard Frazier
> Chair, IEEE 802.3ah EFM Task Force
> FEffenberger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > All,
> > Eliminating file attachments is like stopping people from using ink.
> > Attachments are one of the best features of Email.
> > If you don't like attachments, then it is all to easy to set up your Email
> > client to automatically delete them.
> > As for the basic problem here, I've not noticed a huge volume of
> > virus-induced Email coming from IEEE. I'm assuming that the IEEE
> > server has installed filtering software. Are other peoples'
> > experiences different? If so, the proper solution is to get better
> > filtering software, not to turn off the attachment service.
> > To Hugh's complaint, the slowness you refer to is caused by the
> > medium (copper), and not the message (attachments). (Sorry, I
> > couldn't resist.) As I've said, you can set up your Email
> > client to not download large attachments.
> > Regards,
> > Frank Effenberger.
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Hugh Barrass
> > To: Clay_Hudgins@xxxxxxxxxx
> > Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > Sent: 5/17/02 9:50 AM
> > Subject: Re: May we please eliminate file attachments from this reflector?
> > -Re: VirusAlert
> > Clay,
> > I agree with this. Many people have to access e-mail through slow links
> > (because EFM
> > hasn't finished yet) and attachments are painful. Anyone who wishes to
> > distribute large
> > files should post links (as most people do) or ask for interested
> > parties to send
> > separate e-mail to request the files.
> > Hugh.
> > Clay_Hudgins@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Hi, to who it may concern.
> > >
> > > I have a need for the useful and timely information distributed by the
> > IEEE
> > > 802.3 Reflectors.
> > >
> > > Having said that, I have no need whatsoever to receive file
> > attachments via
> > > these reflectors. I hope that the administration will consider
> > removing
> > > the capability to transfer files via these reflectors, in light of the
> > fact
> > > that junk mail distribution and virus distribution has become the
> > > predominate use of the file attachment capability.
> > >