Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!think.com!snorkelwacker!ira.uka.de!fauern!tumuc!guug!ecrc!dave
From: dave@ecrc.de (Dave Morton)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip
Subject: Re: Cost of Internet access
Message-ID: <2026@ecrc.de>
Date: 13 Nov 90 14:35:19 GMT
References: <WA_6L.@xds13.ferranti.com> <9011101731.AA20352@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: news@ecrc.de
Reply-To: dave@ecrc.de (Dave Morton)
Organization: ecrc
Lines: 23

In article <9011101731.AA20352@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU>, jcurran@SH.CS.NET writes:
|>Regarding dialup IP services, Peter da Silva writes:
|>> Um, won't this cause problems with SMTP? What does SMTP do when the
|>> destination is only available for brief periods, or should you handle
|>> your mail via an MX?
|>
|>As long your implementation automatically brings up the circuit when there
|>is a packet queued (at either end), the application layer can not distinguish
|>dialup IP services from dedicated.  SMTP simply gets a long delay on the 
|>initial connection.
|>
|>/John
           
This is exactly how tund appears to work on X.25 links. If you're on a
fixed cost X.25 net like the WiN then that's ok, if you're on a fee per
packet X.25 net then you might end up paying even though the other site
has established the call. Tund, for example, re-establishes it from your
side. We ran into this situation recently - it can be expensive....

Dave Morton,
European Computer Research Centre		Tel. + (49) 89-92699-139
Arabellastr 17, 8000 Munich 81. Germany.	Fax. + (49) 89-92699-170
E-mail:	dave@ecrc.de