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: 2019-Feb-15
Document File: 11 page(s) / 15K

Publishing Venue

Internet Society Requests For Comment (RFCs)

Related People

M.T. Rose: AUTHOR

Related Documents

10.17487/RFC1082: DOI

Abstract

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.

This text was extracted from a PDF file.
This is the abbreviated version, containing approximately 15% 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

Rose [Page 1]

RFC 1082 POP3 Extended Service November 1988

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 other hosts, or a burden to users who are forced to work on that host.

As discussed in [RFC1081], the problem of giving workstations dynamic access to mail from a mailbox server has been explored in great detail (originally there was [RFC918], this prompted the author to write [RFC1081], independently of this [RFC918] was upgraded to [RFC937]). A natural solution to the problem outlined ab...

Processing...
Loading...