Article View: comp.mail.misc
Article #5086Re: post office protocol
From: pri=-10 Stuart Lynne
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1988 06:50
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 1988 06:50
21 lines
1354 bytes
1354 bytes
In article <578@redsox.UUCP> campbell@redsox.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes:
>At the risk of starting a minor flame war (Go ahead, punk, make my day),
>I'm going to suggest that implementing POP would be a waste of time because
>the 1988 X.400 series of recommendation contains a protocol to implement
>a Message Store, which is exactly what POP provides. (I don't remember
>that actual recommendation number of the Message Store document, since
>my references are all at the office.)
>
>Why fiddle with random hacks when recognized international standards exist?
POP would seem to be a much smaller effort to implement than X.400.
POP will layer into a TCP/IP network quite nicely, X.400 is a little harder.
Personally I'm waiting for the 1992 X.400 to see which way the dust settles
before I start implementing, and POP would be fun to play with in the
meantime :-)
--
Stuart.Lynne@wimsey.bc.ca {ubc-cs,uunet}!van-bc!sl Vancouver,BC,604-937-7532
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<2049@van-bc.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc!slReferences:
<4889@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> <578@redsox.UUCP>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!van-bc!sl From: sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc Subject: Re: post office protocol Message-ID: <2049@van-bc.UUCP> Date: 22 Dec 88 06:50:34 GMT References: <4889@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> <578@redsox.UUCP> Reply-To: sl@van-bc.UUCP (pri=-10 Stuart Lynne) Organization: Wimsey Associates, Vancouver, BC. Lines: 21