Xref: utzoo comp.protocols.tcp-ip:16731 comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc:6265
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!samsung!uunet!fernwood!portal!cup.portal.com!Will
From: Will@cup.portal.com (Will E Estes)
Newsgroups: comp.protocols.tcp-ip,comp.protocols.tcp-ip.ibmpc
Subject: Re: Where Can I Get The IMAP Specification?
Message-ID: <43708@cup.portal.com>
Date: 26 Jun 91 19:43:22 GMT
References: <43626@cup.portal.com> <1991Jun25.111426.16743@wimsey.bc.ca>
  <1991Jun26.040806.8764@milton.u.washington.edu>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 17

<IMAP3 is vapor.  All the existing (and future contemplated) software
<is RFC-1176 based.

Well, the conclusion that IMAP3 will not succeed as an eventual
standard does not follow from the premise that IMAP3 has no
reference implementation.  That aside, after briefly scanning the
IMAP3 RFC it's clear that the IMAP3 and IMAP2 groups have some
bad blood between them and serious differences on how to implement
a mail server.

Can someone out there clarify the politics of this situation and
give some solid reasons why one standard is likely to succeed
over the other?

Thanks,
Will Estes        Internet: Will@cup.portal.com
                  UUCP: apple!cup.portal.com!Will