anyone used mailroute.net yet ?
i briefly tried it out
i'm planning to move my email from Google Apps to my personal email server
so I need mailroute.net for spamfilter and backup
I'm using it for two domains now
RandalSchwartz: it's stable ?
yeah, never a blip
I used mailroute.net for a long while, but then switched to Fastmail.
lots of people seem to like fastmail
i think it's cos it's fast
haw haw
well it is fast
it doesn't just say fast in the name :)
ever tried using hotmail?
it's damn slow
nah, it's very fast
you find hotmail fast?
it loads instantly, so yes
Fastmail is actuallly DAMN fast, if you used their webmail you would see what I'm talking about
i find gmail fast now
but it didn't used to be so fast
m0unds: do you find ebay fast?
i don't use ebay
ok
it's hard to define fast in some ways
but i find ebay is often terribly slow
ebay loads instantly for me
and seems to break quite frequently
the main page?  or actually using the site? :)
both, the site loads fine
it's also rather cluttered/messy/confusing
it's cluttered for sure
ugly
like i was just commiting to buy something
but it's not loading slowly, even navigating around - but unless we're both using the same hardware, same internet connection, etc it's not really easy to compare that stuff
and it brought up this error page saying about to check server status and blah blah
but it took ages and timed out seemingly before doing that
yeah, web performance for big sites is quite a complicated problem
a lot of sites have really slow/terrible backends, and make up for it by caching
i was playing with imap the other day, in mutt, and imap actually isn't too bad when you have low latency connection
even if loading emails on demand
but pretty much any webmail seems slow compared to local mail to me.
i'm not a huge fan of mail clients on the desktop - i use outlook at work because i have to
i've only really seriously used two email clients
pine, and mutt
i use it at home to have an offline copy of messages, but for the most part, i stick to webmail
haha
and when i tried pine with imap on dialup it was terrible
im using mutt atm
my friend uses alpine + uucp for his mail
its great
i been using mutt for about 14 years
he has a server at home that uses UUCP to transmit mail to his outbound MTA, same with inbound
weird
he's on spotty wireless because he's in a really rural area
ahh i se
e
i just read my mail on the mail server
means i get messages quickly
imap can do the same thing though
so uucp helps w/unreliable connectivity. he can write a message and send it, and the local server will transmit it when it can - usually every 10-15 mins or so
heh, i expect my mails to send in < 10 seconds
well now days
well, put yourself on aforementioned spotty wireless and it's hard to make that a reality :P
i used to do fidonet
and it could take days to not get to destination
yeah
i used to have dodgy cellphone reception, and i'd always get text messages in the middle of the night
hahaha
(delayed for hours)
yeah
that's annoying
for some reason it's like it worked more reliably in the middle of the night
like AM radio fade or something, lol
maybe cos less people using it
could be
it was quite annoying
i rung up cell company asking if there were any plans for improving the reception in the area etc
and they tried to sell me some kind of data sharing between sim cards thing
so can share data with a tablet etc
...that's helpful
i'm like, i'm not going to even try using data
but yeah
they couldn't tell me if they were or not
so i changed providers
then just a bit later, there was suddenly a new tower, that i can see from my hosue
would have been nice to know
it's at the same location as other provider, but 3g is actually faster on the one with the new tower
apparently the provider that was working has legacy backhaul
ah, probably newer/better backhaul
yeah
i think they have 1 or 2 megabit for the whole tower
so i'm back with original provider now because that was also impacting phone calls a bit
but yeah sucky net sucks
it's easy to take for granted now
but lots of users in rural areas either have no internet, or really shitty internet
yeah, that's the situation with sprint (US carrier) in my state - we were an affiliate market for years, which meant another company svc'd all the towers and provisioned new cell locations and stuff, so about 60% of the backhaul used in the metro areas is bonded T1s
and sometimes they have dsl or something, but there's like 150 users on 2 megabit
yeah
oh, and the speeds are standardised, so adsl sync will be above 2 megabit
so it congests worse
that was how DSL was where i used to live. our RT/dsl concentrators were fed by a pair of t1s (3mbit), and the provider would provision speeds between 768kbit-1.5mbit
think is, 2 megabit in dialup days would have been heaps
would have been find with 150 users using it at once even
most of the time
but now web sites are often 150k+
and when you realise that dialup does like 3k/sec .. that's like 50 seconds+ to load
yeah
no thanks
hahaha
sure there's compression, but web pages bypass it by using ssl
haven't used dialup since probably 2003
heh
i tested it out a few years back
on a mac
it had a built in modem
and like even instant messsanger loaded slow (adium)
it's like there's also these certificates etc when it connects
adn it lags the dialup out, with 4 second pings
of course, you could say that dialup isn't relevant anymore
but spotty wireless can be like dialup
wireless/3g
yep
the IT dept network where I work is one such awful wireless network :)
heh
do you use 3g?
i've never acutally used a really bad wireless network i think
802.11x for site wireless - i work in a separate division on a closed network, but occasionally have to use IT's gear and it's horribly managed
ahh
AP spacing is really erratic, really hamfisted qos attempts by an incompetent neteng
wireless is actualyl kind of complicated as soon as you go over a medium sized house size
for coverage
ie bigger enough to need multiple access points
facility is 1.2m sq ft
so yup
hahaha
i used to think aqm was qos
so when people said qos they meant aqm
but they don't space them appropriately, so you're nearly always hopping between aps
but now i realise when people say qos they mean prioritisation
yeah
and i'm much more in favour of aqm than prioritisation
what's handover like between ap's?
it's awful because of spacing
but i mean do things shift ok?
i once tried to use voip on my cellphone shifting from wifi to 3g
it didn't work :(
they would if they were properly spaced - the issue is that they're too far apart, so you get big gaps where snr and signal levels are way too low to choose a particular ap reliably
but can you use voip and shift around ok?
oh
they could just use bigger antennas :)
yeah, or not cheap out and use the right amount of hardware to begin with :)
i wonder if there could be like micro ap points like lightbulbs
spaced out all over the place
and just cover the surrounding area
but join together with others
true
people always cheap out though
esp when things are done by tender
which i imagine in a big company it is?
thing is 802.11ac won't actually fix tehse kinds of issues
everyone seems to be getting excited about higher bandwidth
without improving the minimum level of service as much
that said, n is better than g
ok i should go to bed
heh