Re: POP3 protocol question

Steve Dorner <> Tue, 11 October 1994 00:55 UTC

Received: from by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06057; 10 Oct 94 20:55 EDT
Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US by IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa06053; 10 Oct 94 20:55 EDT
Received: from PO5.ANDREW.CMU.EDU by CNRI.Reston.VA.US id aa01619; 10 Oct 94 20:55 EDT
Received: (from postman@localhost) by (8.6.9/8.6.9) id UAA13714; Mon, 10 Oct 1994 20:52:00 -0400
Received: via switchmail for; Mon, 10 Oct 1994 20:51:59 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from via qmail ID </afs/>; Mon, 10 Oct 1994 20:50:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from ( []) by (8.6.9/8.6.9) with SMTP id UAA23251 for <>; Mon, 10 Oct 1994 20:50:39 -0400
Received: from by with SMTP id AA10851 (5.67b8/IDA-1.5 for <>); Mon, 10 Oct 1994 19:50:13 -0500
Received: from [] ( by with SMTP id AA00638 (5.67b/IDA-1.5); Mon, 10 Oct 1994 19:51:04 -0500
X-Sender: sdorner@
Message-Id: <aabf8da806030001b412@[]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 1994 19:50:32 -0500
To: Michael D'Errico <>
Sender: ietf-archive-request@IETF.CNRI.Reston.VA.US
From: Steve Dorner <>
Subject: Re: POP3 protocol question
Cc: POP3 IETF Mailing List <>, Jerome Chan <>

At 6:10 PM 10/10/94, Michael D'Errico wrote:
>However, the ability to send mail does not belong in POP3.  No debate
>necessary.  POP3 servers are such different creatures from SMTP servers
>that I'm surprised anybody who understands both would argue for it.

The reasons people argue for it are varied.  Some of the people doing the
arguing are people who understand the issues quite well.  On the balance,
I'm not convinced by them, but there's really no need to get absolutist
about this.

Steve Dorner, Qualcomm Incorporated
  Whosoever has lived long enough to find out what life is, knows how deep a
  debt of gratitude we owe to Adam.  He brought death into this world.
                                                                Mark Twain