Re: my 2 cents worth
Michael D'Errico <Mike@software.com> Tue, 07 June 1994 22:06 UTC
Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19882; 7 Jun 94 18:06 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19877; 7 Jun 94 18:06 EDT
Received: from PO3.ANDREW.CMU.EDU by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19224; 7 Jun 94 18:06 EDT
Received: (from postman@localhost) by po3.andrew.cmu.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) id RAA04511; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 17:57:50 -0400
Received: via switchmail for ietf-pop3+@andrew.cmu.edu; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 17:57:49 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from po3.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q002/QF.chxCnQ:00Udb8F0E5C>; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 17:55:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rome.software.com (rome.software.com [198.17.234.2]) by po3.andrew.cmu.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) with ESMTP id RAA04348 for <ietf-pop3@andrew.cmu.edu>; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 17:55:33 -0400
Received: from rome (rome.software.com [127.0.0.1]) by rome.software.com with ESMTP id AAA3660 for <ietf-pop3@andrew.cmu.edu>; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 14:55:27 -0700
To: ietf-pop3@andrew.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: my 2 cents worth
In-reply-to: <Pine.3.89.9406071652.A16154-0100000@java.cc.mcgill.ca>
Date: Tue, 07 Jun 1994 14:55:25 -0700
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Michael D'Errico <Mike@software.com>
Message-ID: <19940607225527.AAA3660@rome.software.com>
Ian Duncan <id@cc.mcgill.ca> wrote: >On Tue, 7 Jun 1994, Michael D'Errico wrote: >> >> I think that characters from Base64 are too restrictive. Base64 exists >> because of the need to gateway messages between different mail systems, >> some of which have horrible constraints. With POP, you have an 8-bit >> connection between client and server to work with. > >I think the premise that POP implies an 8 bit path between ends is a >little dangerous. In the absence of words to the contrary in the RFC I'd >assume printable ascii and very selected controls. Your selective quoting suggests that I wanted to allow 8bit characters in the unique identifiers. I made no such statement, and if you quoted my next sentence that would be clear. I wrote, "I think that Steve Dorner's suggestion to limit the uid's to characters in the range 0x21 to 0x7e (printable 7-bit ASCII except space) is a good one." >I know the origin of base64. I was suggesting we avoid tokens that are >long strings of ascii and instead use very large numbers, encoded in >base64 to keep the representation short -- 24 digits of base64 can carry >2^144 bits in a safe, documented, well understood and easy to decode >format. My MTA stores messages in separate files with pseudo-message-id's as the filename. These are unique for every message that comes into the system so I would like to be able to use them as the unique identifier in the UIDL command. Here is how UIDL currently works on my POP server: C: UIDL S: +OK S: 1 19940603172145.AAA8293@ANDREW.CMU.EDU S: 2 19940603180614.AAA8463@mx1.cac.washington.edu S: 3 19940603180924.AAB8502@nic.cerf.net S: 4 19940603181503.AAA8771@rome.software.com S: . I don't see why this is so bad. I'd hate to force myself and others to encode information into Base64 when there's no need to. Michael D'Errico mike@software.com
- my 2 cents worth Ian Duncan
- Re: my 2 cents worth Frank Bieser
- Re: my 2 cents worth Steve Dorner
- Re: my 2 cents worth John Gardiner Myers
- Re: my 2 cents worth Michael D'Errico
- Re: my 2 cents worth Ian Duncan
- Re: my 2 cents worth Michael D'Errico
- Re: my 2 cents worth Michael D'Errico
- Re: my 2 cents worth John Gardiner Myers
- Re: my 2 cents worth Ian Duncan
- Re: my 2 cents worth Ian Duncan