Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lts!amanda
From: amanda@lts.UUCP (Amanda Walker)
Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc
Subject: Re: post office protocol
Message-ID: <746@lts.UUCP>
Date: 21 Dec 88 15:53:09 GMT
References: <4889@mailgw.cc.umich.edu> <578@redsox.UUCP>
Reply-To: amanda@lts.UUCP (Amanda Walker)
Organization: InterCon Systems Corporation, Reston, VA
Lines: 23

campbell@redsox.UUCP (Larry Campbell) writes:
    [POP2 vs. X.400 Message Store]
    Why fiddle with random hacks when recognized international standards exist?

No problem, just tell me a site from which I can anonymously FTP a working,
freely distributable implementation that runs over TCP/IP.

I'm sorry, you'll have to speak more loudly...

Oh, and since we have to talk to already existing mailers that speak
SMTP/RFC822, I'll need a protocol gateway that at least translates
X.400 to RFC822 (so's I can hand messages off to sendmail).

Hmm... lots of static on this connection.

"Exist" is a relative term sometimes...  Trying POP now doesn't
preclude using X.400 once it's actually available to whoever wants it.

-- 
Amanda Walker			...!uunet!lts!amanda / lts!amanda@uunet.uu.net
			  InterCon, 11732 Bowman Green Drive, Reston, VA 22090
--							 Phone: (703) 435-8170
UNIX: the only operating system that can be destroyed by mail.