 |
 |
Sorry I didn't make that clear. I was reporting the time stamps from the email header itself. It was sent at 11:33 from [log in to unmask] and arrived at my MSU mailbox [log in to unmask] at 12:06. No client software, and no forwarding, involved. My reading of the headers is that the entire 33-minute delay occurred at the server smtp.notification.com ([208.93.120.245]). Based on that, an obvious speculation is that the alert system works through an outside contractor, and it perhaps can't provide as rapid alerts as we might like. Or maybe I'm misinterpreting... -----Original Message----- From: Robert Kriegel [mailto:[log in to unmask]] Sent: Tuesday, April 06, 2010 2:52 PM To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: [MSUNAG] Emergency Warning Anecdote I received three alert emails from the MSU system. The first was a severe thunderstorm warning at 11:00 am; the second was the "Tornado Warning for Ingham County" message at 11:32 am. The last was the all clear, sorry I've already deleted that one, but it arrived after we had all returned to our work stations. Our main departmental office received pager and phone messages from MSU police soon after the E.L. sirens started to sound. So for Anthony Hall the system worked quite well. I received the above emails directly from mail.msu.edu to a Eudora client set to query the mail server every 5 minutes. If there was a significant delay in receiving your email messages, consider whether you were receiving them directly or were they being routed to mail.msu.edu and then forwarded through another mail server, such as Exchange. Bob Kriegel Anthony Hall Emergency Team Leader At 02:22 PM 4/6/2010, you wrote: >I received the warning email message at 12:06, 33 minutes after it was >sent, and the all-clear email at 12:10, 20 minutes after it was sent. >Is there anyone who received the warning before it expired (at 11:45 >for the southern Ingham County part, the closest warning area to us). > >One odd thing about the emails and the siren is that Lansing, East >Lansing, the MSU campus, etc. were not even part of the area for which >the warning was issued. I guess whoever manages the siren and the alert >system is just being cautious. However, couldn't the email system >include the actual text of the National Weather Service warning, so >recipients could read the details for themselves?