Re: my 2 cents worth

John Gardiner Myers <jgm+@cmu.edu> Tue, 07 June 1994 22:40 UTC

Received: from ietf.nri.reston.va.us by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20123; 7 Jun 94 18:40 EDT
Received: from CNRI.RESTON.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa20119; 7 Jun 94 18:40 EDT
Received: from ANDREW.CMU.EDU by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa19713; 7 Jun 94 18:40 EDT
Received: (from postman@localhost) by andrew.cmu.edu (8.6.7/8.6.6) id SAA16298; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 18:36:42 -0400
Received: via switchmail; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 18:36:41 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/testq0/QF.MhxDNH200WBwQ1Dk55>; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 18:36:03 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu via qmail ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr7/jm36/.Outgoing/QF.EhxDN7a00WBw010MQ7>; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 18:35:51 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from BatMail.robin.v2.14.CUILIB.3.45.SNAP.NOT.LINKED.hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu.sun4c.411 via MS.5.6.hogtown.andrew.cmu.edu.sun4c_411; Tue, 7 Jun 1994 18:35:51 -0400 (EDT)
Message-ID: <chxDN7O00WBw010MI_@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue, 7 Jun 1994 18:35:51 -0400 (EDT)
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: John Gardiner Myers <jgm+@cmu.edu>
To: POP3 IETF Mailing List <ietf-pop3+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Re: my 2 cents worth
In-Reply-To: <19940607225527.AAA3660@rome.software.com>
References: <19940607225527.AAA3660@rome.software.com>
Beak: is Not

I also see no advantage to encoding the uid's in base64.  I would see
an advantage to limiting their length, but on the other hand it is
useful for servers to be able to use the contents of the Message-ID:
header when it is assured such a header will exist.

My server currently works as follows:

C: UIDL
S: +OK unique-id listing follows
S: 1 350
S: 2 351
S: 3 354
S: 4 356
S: 5 357
S: .

I happen to have these handy IMAP4 UID's lying around in the
database...

-- 
_.John G. Myers		Internet: jgm+@CMU.EDU
			LoseNet:  ...!seismo!ihnp4!wiscvm.wisc.edu!give!up