Re: [dtn] draft-blanchet-dtn-email-over-bp-00.txt

[Marc Blanchet <[e-mail]>]

Read your [2] paper. Very interesting, very detailed. About mail, you used a process that look at changes in the mailbox directories of users, tar them in a tar file that is put into bundle(s). The other endpoint does the reverse. I’m fine with this as a research trial but I’m not sure it is really what we are looking for, in terms of interoperability. Both endpoints need to support the same tar + maildir formats, I’m not sure that will work with commercial email systems for example. The solution I’m proposing is to use very very standard format of RFC822 much easier to integrate with any MTA, since that format is the primary exchange format for the last 40 years… It is also not dependent on any sync mechanism which sometimes goes out of sync and require pretty significant handling of errors of synchronisation. My proposal is almost as if two MTA are on the same machine and exchange email using RFC822 format in a very simple interprocess communication, but that interprocess communication is actually a BP “pipe”.

Regards, Marc.

> Le 18 janv. 2023 à 07:52, Stephen Farrell <[e-mail]> a écrit :
> 
> 
> Hiya,
> 
> On 18/01/2023 00:29, Marc Blanchet wrote:
>>> Sorry, no. I can probably try dig up some paper but forget
>>> how much implementation detail we documented. Will look in
>>> the morning (here:-)
>> Great. Looking forward.
> 
> It's been quite a while since I looked back at that
> stuff sorry, so best I can find is from about a year
> or so before the mail stuff fully worked. There's one
> paper [1] that may be paywalled, (if so, [2] is not).
> There's a section in there on "Email service." IIRC
> we extended that some in subsequent summers.
> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
> [1] https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11276-011-0323-1
> [2] https://down.dsg.cs.tcd.ie/summer09paper/summer09paper/summer09.pdf
> <OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc>