From owner-freebsd-chat Fri Jun 6 16:14:03 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA18286 for chat-outgoing; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 16:14:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ethanol.gnu.ai.mit.edu (we-refuse-to-spy-on-our-users@ethanol.gnu.ai.mit.edu [128.52.46.64]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA18275 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 16:13:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: by ethanol.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.8.5/8.6.12GNU) id TAA01198; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 19:13:52 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Jun 1997 19:13:52 -0400 Message-Id: <199706062313.TAA01198@ethanol.gnu.ai.mit.edu> To: scott@statsci.com CC: davidn@labs.usn.blaze.net.au, chat@FreeBSD.ORG In-reply-to: (message from Scott Blachowicz on Thu, 05 Jun 1997 14:15:41 -0700) Subject: Re: uucp uid's From: Joel Ray Holveck Reply-to: joelh@gnu.ai.mit.edu Sender: owner-chat@FreeBSD.ORG X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> We need a new protocol, imho. Not unlike smtp, or maybe even a >> variation of smtp that is receiver driven. >Seems you could add some commands to SMTP to say HELO and SEND me my mail? You could. You'd pretty well have POP when you were through. What's the point in augmenting SMTP for a SEND extension? Protocols have their purposes for a reason. SMTP is designed to send mail; leave it there. If you want to receive mail, you can design a different protocol, or use a protocol that's been designed and implemented already such as POP. That way, other systems that need to send mail only don't need to mess around changing their protocol to meet the needs of extensions added for an entirely different purpose. Happy hacking, joelh -- http://www.wp.com/piquan --- Joel Ray Holveck --- joelh@gnu.ai.mit.edu All my opinions are my own, not the Free Software Foundation's. Second law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation -- core dumped