Dismiss
InnovationQ/InnovationQ Plus content will be updated on Sunday, June 25, 10am ET, with new patent and non-patent literature collections. Click here to learn more.
Browse Prior Art Database

Post Office Protocol: Version 3: Extended service offerings (RFC1082)

IP.com Disclosure Number: IPCOM000001891D
Original Publication Date: 1988-Nov-01
Included in the Prior Art Database: 2000-Sep-12
Document File: 9 page(s) / 23K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

M.T. Rose: AUTHOR

Abstract

Status of This Memo

This text was extracted from a ASCII Text document.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 13% of the total text.

Network Working Group M. Rose

Request for Comments: 1082 TWG

November 1988

Post Office Protocol - Version 3

Extended Service Offerings

Status of This Memo

This memo suggests a simple method for workstations to dynamically

access mail from a discussion group server, as an extension to an

earlier memo which dealt with dynamically accessing mail from a

mailbox server using the Post Office Protocol - Version 3 (POP3).

This RFC specifies a proposed protocol for the Internet community,

and requests discussion and suggestions for improvements. All of the

extensions described in this memo to the POP3 are OPTIONAL.

Distribution of this memo is unlimited.

Introduction and Motivation

It is assumed that the reader is familiar with RFC 1081 that

discusses the Post Office Protocol - Version 3 (POP3) [RFC1081].

This memo describes extensions to the POP3 which enhance the service

it offers to clients. This additional service permits a client host

to access discussion group mail, which is often kept in a separate

spool area, using the general POP3 facilities.

The next section describes the evolution of discussion groups and the

technologies currently used to implement them. To summarize:

o An exploder is used to map from a single address to

a list of addresses which subscribe to the list, and redirects

any subsequent error reports associated with the delivery of

each message. This has two primary advantages:

- Subscribers need know only a single address

- Responsible parties get the error reports and not

the subscribers

o Typically, each subscription address is not a person's private

maildrop, but a system-wide maildrop, which can be accessed

by more than one user. This has several advantages:

- Only a single copy of each message need traverse the

net for a given site (which may contain several local

hosts). This conserves bandwidth and cycles.

- Only a single copy of each message need reside on each

subscribing host. This conserves disk space.

- The private maildrop for each user is not cluttered

with discussion group mail.

Despite this optimization of resources, further economy can be

achieved at sites with more than one host. Typically, sites with

more than one host either:

1. Replicate discussion group mail on each host. This

results in literally gigabytes of disk space committed to

unnecessarily store redundant information.

2. Keep discussion group mail on one host and give all users a

login on that host (in addition to any other logins they may

have). This is usually a gross inconvenience for users who

work on ot...