All TF Sysops have similar problems when deailing with enforcing constraints on storage, be it mail, arbitrary files, or web pages. I do not have an answer to this but the utilities I have outline do exist and will help until additional measures are incorporated into the server software.
I do not see where additional notification even at logout will help. You have already pointed out that messages concerning the problem do not cause users to look in their mailboxes. I suspect that closing messages prior to logout would be dispositioned similarly. Attempts to force users clean up their mailboxes upon logout will probably be met with forced hangups.
My suggestions will result in the deletion of problematic messages, and instill in system users, the importance of reading and heeding system notices. If the userbase is warned that this policy is automatically enforced by scheduled programming, then the loss is not your fault but theirs through thier disregard of the information you have provided to them. This method is used on other corporate mail systems with shared directories to enforce storage constraints, and works well.
You could, at your discretion, backup client mailboxes before the cleaning routines were run, and then let the users experience the loss, and "rescue them" later.
I realize that you operate in a business environment and that diplomacy is required to approach this situation whereby your customers must be made aware that your system is not their unlimited free-space, personal file storage area. They should realize also that copies of critical documents should be archived at their own sites to preclude data loss through catastrophic failure at your site.
On 4/20/98 3:56 PM, Rod Paine wrote:
>Dainiel, > >>>"The newer versions of Suzie can delete old mail, and OAT provides a >mailbox cleanup routine also. Would any of these help?"<< > >Not really. Much of the time they don't look in their Mailbox, and at >other times they don't save a copy to their hard drive. It's why I am >looking for something to call their attention to Mail before they >log-off... more or less forcing them to take care of it. > >-Rod
