From owner-freebsd-chat Mon Mar 26 0:59:15 2001 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from nef.ens.fr (nef.ens.fr [129.199.96.32]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C96037B71A for ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 00:59:11 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Rahul.Siddharthan@lpt.ens.fr) Received: from corto.lpt.ens.fr (corto.lpt.ens.fr [129.199.122.2]) by nef.ens.fr (8.10.1/1.01.28121999) with ESMTP id f2Q8xAq75741 ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:59:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from (rsidd@localhost) by corto.lpt.ens.fr (8.9.3/jtpda-5.3.1) id KAA87510 ; Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:59:07 +0200 (CEST) Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 10:59:07 +0200 From: Rahul Siddharthan To: Brad Knowles Cc: Terry Lambert , chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: ISP pooping out; any BSD friendly ISP out there???? Message-ID: <20010326105907.B86822@lpt.ens.fr> References: <200103240132.SAA05871@usr05.primenet.com> <20010325145630.H43051@lpt.ens.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.2.5i In-Reply-To: ; from brad.knowles@skynet.be on Mon, Mar 26, 2001 at 01:58:58AM +0200 X-Operating-System: FreeBSD 3.4-STABLE i386 Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Brad Knowles said on Mar 26, 2001 at 01:58:58: > At 2:56 PM +0200 3/25/01, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > > > Rather than POP, have you considered IMAP? I believe it's had > > security problems now and then, but it can't be worse than > > telnet'ing... and it's better than nothing if you don't find a > > suitable provider for proper shell access. > > Keep in mind that virtually all providers I know of that support > IMAP will also support POP on the same boxes. Indeed, it's a lot > harder to get them to support IMAP if they already support POP than > the reverse. I believe that both Cyrus and UW IMAP packages come > with a POP3 server in the box, and I know that UW IMAP is fully > compatible with virtually all mailbox formats out there, which means > you should be able to easily run it on a machine that already has an > existing POP server implementation. > > So, what it comes down to is that this should not be a factor > that should need to be considered. I'm not sure I follow that. If it's harder to get them to support IMAP when they support POP, it's harder for you to use IMAP. An IMAP server must be running at their end. You can't use IMAP on your mail client if they only have a POP server. Still, I suppose a shell account is preferable, because you can access it even when you're travelling and don't have your own laptop with you. R To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message