none

none

[Scott]

forsyth@plan9.cs.york.ac.uk writes:
| i'm afraid i'd prefer to die first, so i'm unlikely to implement it.
| pop3 is `yet another protocol that would not be needed if people used a (any)
| reasonable file service protocol', but at least it's small.

There remains the matter of a recovery protocol.  Plan 9 handles a
server crash by requiring the client to reboot [:-(]. Brazil is said to
have a recovery protocol.  What does Inferno do?  (My copy of the
documentation is hundreds of miles away at the moment.)

none

[Scott]

forsyth@plan9.cs.york.ac.uk writes:
| just out of interest, why is your server crashing so often?

i didn't say "often".  but it does happen once in a while.

none

[forsyth]

>>There remains the matter of a recovery protocol.  Plan 9 handles a
>>server crash by requiring the client to reboot [:-(]. Brazil is said to

pop3 and similar internet protocols, such as smtp, nntp, http, etc, already fail
(disconnect) when the server or network fails, so using a file service
protocol with similar properties makes no difference.

just out of interest, why is your server crashing so often?

none

[forsyth]

i'm afraid i'd prefer to die first, so i'm unlikely to implement it.
pop3 is `yet another protocol that would not be needed if people used a (any)
reasonable file service protocol', but at least it's small.
imap is ludicrous. #C/cmd points to a simpler yet more general approach.
imap is a good example of `every protocol its own, disjoint operating system'.

------ original message follows ------

>From cse.psu.edu!owner-9fans Sun Dec  1 21:19:28 GMT 1996
Received: from localhost (majordom@localhost) by cse.psu.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA16129; Sun, 1 Dec 1996 15:58:01 -0500 (EST)
Received: by claven.cse.psu.edu (bulk_mailer v1.5); Sun, 1 Dec 1996 15:57:58 -0500
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by cse.psu.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA16111 for 9fans-outgoing; Sun, 1 Dec 1996 15:57:51 -0500 (EST)
X-Authentication-Warning: claven.cse.psu.edu: majordom set sender to owner-9fans using -f
Received: from mako.northsea.com (qmailr@mako.northsea.com [206.65.69.92]) by cse.psu.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id PAA16107 for <9fans@cse.psu.edu>; Sun, 1 Dec 1996 15:57:45 -0500 (EST)
Received: (qmail 20187 invoked by uid 100); 1 Dec 1996 20:56:20 -0000
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: none
References: <199612011659.LAA14808@cse.psu.edu>
Organization: North Sea, Ltd.
X-PGP-Fingerprint: 5B 75 89 9C 86 E9 99 4F  AB 26 91 F8 55 C9 F7 1E
Comments: Hyperbole mail buttons accepted, v4.01
From: Stan Norton <norton@northsea.com>
Date: 01 Dec 1996 15:56:20 -0500
In-Reply-To: forsyth@plan9.cs.york.ac.uk's message of Sun, 1 Dec 1996 17:04:21 GMT
Message-ID: <x77mn2htl7.fsf@mako.northsea.com>
Lines: 8
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.2.25/XEmacs 19.14
Sender: owner-9fans@cse.psu.edu
Reply-To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Precedence: bulk

forsyth@plan9.cs.york.ac.uk writes:

> 
> i've got a pop3 implementation i can (will) give him.
> it's smaller than the bsd one, but still too much for such
> a simple protocol.

has imap been implemented?

none

[Stan]

forsyth@plan9.cs.york.ac.uk writes:

> 
> i've got a pop3 implementation i can (will) give him.
> it's smaller than the bsd one, but still too much for such
> a simple protocol.

has imap been implemented?