From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: forsyth@caldo.demon.co.uk
To: 9fans@cs.psu.edu
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20001101182523.BEDAD199E6@mail>
Subject: [9fans] /n/smtp
Date: Wed,  1 Nov 2000 18:21:08 +0000
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 1fe0ee58-eac9-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

boyd fell into the RFC trap by naming the service /n/smtp.
of course, smtp provides a few features that aren't captured
by that interface, both in the primary RFC and in the set of
derived ones.

rename it /chan/postoffice, do exactly the same thing, and it
should be fine.  in fact, `smtp' is too specific anyhow, since you
might be using another delivery method in the postoffice.
if you're a real masochist, it might be x.400 (or
whatever the correct x.number might be); i still fondly remember those
x.400/rfc822 gateways in the uk. infrastructure.