district court judgements

Where to buy? Where can I find? How do I? Getting started.
FinlandGirl
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:43 am

Re: district court judgements

Post by FinlandGirl » Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:33 pm

suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:08 pm
FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:54 pm
At the SMTP level you only know whether the next mail server has accepted the email.
You do not even necessarily know whether this was the final email server on the way.
You do not know at all whether this server has delivered the email to the end email-inbox of the user.
Here you go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MX_record
This only shows the first server to send an email to, it does not prove that a server has delivered the email to the end email-inbox of the user.
suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:08 pm
FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:54 pm
It is laughable when you claim every Gmail user would be responsible if somewhere inside Google the email you sent was not delivered.
That is the complete opposite of what I said. Is it an English comprehension issue? Or a technical comprehension? End-user sender is not responsible to track the internal delivery. Nor is the SMTP sending server responsible the delivery to the end user mailbox.
...
Thankfully, emails and SMTP don't work on imagination. :twisted: And PS. Bad analogy. This would be applicable ONLY if the landlord also owned the full postal service. In this case, the landlord also depends on the mail provider (posti) that would need to goof up.
...
So, if you have the delivery report, that is enough evidence to prove transmission. In the receiver's email server, let's say a corporate email server fails, that is not the fault of the sender.
What is wrong with you? Is it an English comprehension issue? Or a technical comprehension? A complete lack of logical thinking?

In the common case where the landlord has a Gmail address, does the landlord fully own Google?
Your landlord depends either on Google or Posti in the same way for delivery.

Your assumptions like "corporate email server" also sound as if any knowledge you might have had is pretty dated, in the year 2021 own email servers are very rare for companies of any size.
suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:08 pm
As I said, sendmail administrator on HP-UX and Solaris from 1992-1997 – likely before you were even born.
...
Not sure if you know what sendmail is!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mansplaining



Re: district court judgements

Sponsor:

Finland Forum Ad-O-Matic
 

suomynona.yllatot
Posts: 90
Joined: Wed Jan 23, 2013 1:38 pm

Re: district court judgements

Post by suomynona.yllatot » Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:33 pm

FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:33 pm
This only shows the first server to send an email to, it does not prove that a server has delivered the email to the end email-inbox of the user.
🤦🏻‍♂️ I suggest you actually read my emails more carefully! You very much sound like the half-knowledge handle that you represent.


FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:33 pm
Your assumptions like "corporate email server" also sound as if any knowledge you might have had is pretty dated, in the year 2021 own email servers are very rare for companies of any size.
Last technical role, o365 and security architect, working on DMARC, DKIM, and SPF. Last work done is migrating a multichannel corporate support centre (unified comm) for a corporate call centre. So, own email servers are very much still the norm, just that the service is a hosted service.

Nowadays as a forensic auditor. What's your credential?
FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:33 pm
In the common case where the landlord has a Gmail address, does the landlord fully own Google?
Your landlord depends either on Google or Posti in the same way for delivery.
"#€%&/()!!! Listen, that is exactly what I said. I suggest you actually get more competent on this. Here's the crux: If the sender sends an email via Gmail and gets a delivery receipt (it is possible if you know how), it means that the server has delivered it to the MX responsible host. If the OP has the delivery receipt that is valid as an act on his behalf.

If a company is using e.g. Gmail and it crashes and the email is lost, it is still the company's issue. In a court of law (ask me how I know) it still stands to reason that the sender sent the email in time. The fact that the email server crashed is not valid as an argument from the company point of view.

End of story.

I would not have to explain if you understood it!!! There are some times when I explain things, but that is the problem with is with non-men-understanding! Mansplaining? I am not explaining it to you as a woman but as a half baked cookie that presumably passed out of a 2 year IT vocational school! So, even mansplaining does not work!

- Again, what's your cred?

Not going to do it anymore. Understand what you want, but what you understand does not define how things work!
Yep, it is! What's the big deal?

FinlandGirl
Posts: 588
Joined: Sat Nov 09, 2019 10:43 am

Re: district court judgements

Post by FinlandGirl » Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:49 pm

suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:33 pm
FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:33 pm
In the common case where the landlord has a Gmail address, does the landlord fully own Google?
Your landlord depends either on Google or Posti in the same way for delivery.
"#€%&/()!!! Listen, that is exactly what I said. I suggest you actually get more competent on this. Here's the crux: If the sender sends an email via Gmail and gets a delivery receipt (it is possible if you know how), it means that the server has delivered it to the MX responsible host. If the OP has the delivery receipt that is valid as an act on his behalf.
If the recipient sends a receipt that is as good as any other email that acknowledges receipt.

Everything you talk about proving delivery at the SMTP level is just rubbish, and assuming a fitness studio would have an own email server is so 2000.
suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:33 pm
Last technical role, o365 and security architect, working on DMARC, DKIM, and SPF. Last work done is migrating a multichannel corporate support centre (unified comm) for a corporate call centre.
Where is your LinkedIn profile?
I guess you are just making this up for your mansplaining.

User avatar
network_engineer
Posts: 747
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 10:21 am

Re: district court judgements

Post by network_engineer » Sun Jan 10, 2021 10:32 pm

suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:08 pm
... if the sender sends an email via Gmail and gets a delivery receipt (it is possible if you know how), it means that the server has delivered it to the MX responsible host. If the OP has the delivery receipt that is valid as an act on his behalf.
The above poster's view is correct. It is referring to DSN (RFC 1891).
FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:49 pm
If the recipient sends a receipt that is as good as any other email that acknowledges receipt.
Not sure what you mean by recipient, but the delivery ack is generated by a server.

If I understood the post correctly, *if* the sender (person) has a transmission receipt, then from a contractual point of view, it would prove that he has taken actions to terminate the contract. If the receiver (company) has not received the email, they need to take that up with the provider, but from a consumer point of view, the consumer has taken due actions to terminate the contract.

NukkuMatti
Posts: 43
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2015 9:51 pm

Re: district court judgements

Post by NukkuMatti » Sat Jan 16, 2021 10:29 pm

suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 7:08 pm
FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:54 pm
This is nonsense.
As I said, and maybe I should have spelt out every alphabet: been a sendmail administrator on HP-UX and Solaris from 1992-1997 – likely before you were even born. Sure, the standards may have changed a bit, basic structure remains the same. In addition to sendmail, been a DNS admin till -2000. Not sure if you know what sendmail is!

FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:54 pm
At the SMTP level you only know whether the next mail server has accepted the email.
You do not even necessarily know whether this was the final email server on the way.
You do not know at all whether this server has delivered the email to the end email-inbox of the user.
Here you go:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MX_record
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mail_delivery_agent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_age ... structure)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_submission_agent
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Message_transfer_agent

And FYI, I did some work with standards too, on some of the documents, my real name is visible.
FinlandGirl wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 5:54 pm
It is laughable when you claim every Gmail user would be responsible if somewhere inside Google the email you sent was not delivered.
That is the complete opposite of what I said. Is it an English comprehension issue? Or a technical comprehension? End-user sender is not responsible to track the internal delivery. Nor is the SMTP sending server responsible the delivery to the end user mailbox.
suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 2:32 pm
Imagine your landlord has a friend as witness to prove that she terminated your rental contract 6 months ago by unregistered letter placed stamped into a postbox, and that you have to leave your apartment tomorrow. How do you prove that you did not receive the letter 6 months ago?
Unregistered letters and emails can get silently lost on the way, and the receiver cannot know or even prove that something never arrived.
Thankfully, emails and SMTP don't work on imagination. :twisted: And PS. Bad analogy. This would be applicable ONLY if the landlord also owned the full postal service. In this case, the landlord also depends on the mail provider (posti) that would need to goof up.

Email transmission and delivery report confirms that the delivery has been delivered to the final recipient.

The SMTP Server records the e-mail delivery information from your computer to the recipient's mail server. This information is stored in the log files or Mail Delivery Reports on the server. Mail Delivery Reports and mail delivery history are available. The detailed error report is also provided if a recipient's server goes offline, a server's heavy loads, an error in the email address and etc.

So, if you have the delivery report, that is enough evidence to prove transmission. In the receiver's email server, let's say a corporate email server fails, that is not the fault of the sender.

Case in point, send an email to the a Kirjaamo on Fri. If you get an acknowledgement and the whole email server crashes and emails since Friday are not recoverable, the sender is not responsible.

PS. And oh, most SMTP implementations use TCP, not UDP, so lost packets are also not an issue.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: Thank you all so much for explaining for what I did not have the energy and drive to do anymore, sometimes it is frustrating to... well you know...

One remark.. off topic but important: there is made a comparison above, that is also incorrect: let me point it out:
suomynona.yllatot wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 2:32 pm
Imagine your landlord has a friend as witness to prove that she terminated your rental contract 6 months ago by unregistered letter placed stamped into a postbox, and that you have to leave your apartment tomorrow. How do you prove that you did not receive the letter 6 months ago?
Unregistered letters and emails can get silently lost on the way, and the receiver cannot know or even prove that something never arrived.
That is not a valid comparison, the argument that a witness testifying the letter was sent is not enough in the law for giving notice on rent of an apartment, therefore you would not need to leave the apartment.
The law on rental agreements for housing is very explicit about this, that the notice on the rent by the landlord to the tenant, has to be delivered by a service provider or similar, or picked up by the recipient from the courthouse by signing for reception. If the recipient does not collect it, it will be served to him personally by an employee of the court.. (you're being served) In any case an autograph for reception from the recipient is required. Therefore Email is not valid for ending a rental contract of an apartment.

I Thought it is important to point out that for housing contracts, a completely separate law is applicable. This is NOT the case for a subscription on a sports facility or other consumer service...

Stay safe
use a mask
keep your distance
get vaccinated (if you can).
Peace and love to you all


Post Reply