From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Andrew <afrayedknot@thefrayedknot.armory.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] Re: Free Plan 9 "shell" accounts?
Message-ID: <20030518194920.GA1242@thefrayedknot.armory.com>
References: <200305181417.h4IEHf524723@augusta.math.psu.edu> <3EC7A07D.7000900@proweb.co.uk> <007801c31d72$a2741660$e3944251@insultant.net> <20030518192542.GA1174@thefrayedknot.armory.com> <008c01c31d74$9f98a9e0$e3944251@insultant.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <008c01c31d74$9f98a9e0$e3944251@insultant.net>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.1i
Date: Sun, 18 May 2003 12:49:20 -0700
Topicbox-Message-UUID: b11b77a6-eacb-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

well, thats email in general, as Dan said, qmail is fine, modulo a
few issues. but you're absolutly right, email is a disaster...i read
rfc821 (or was it 822) the other day...all i have to say is: wtf!?

although i dont think qmail itself is bad, its fast (regardless of the
multiple tcp delivery thing), its secure (theres an idea!), and its
pretty simple no bells and whistles and not much bloat, theres not much
more one could ask for given the underlying circumstances.

thanks for the input though ;)


Andrew

On Sun, May 18, 2003 at 09:35:21PM +0200, boyd, rounin wrote:
> > maybe Im going to look stupid for asking this, but whats wrong with
> > qmail?
>
> 4 chars ... SMTP -- Simple Mail Transfer Protocol
>
> no files, no 8 bit chars, nothing but 7 bit ASCII.
>
> then we get the 150 pages of the 4 MINE (sic) rfcs and we
> know who the guilty are and why and it is no longer SIMPLE.
>
> POP ... Post Office Protocol -- simple
>
> IMAP ... DISASTER, it tries to be a file server but it's only dealing with mail.
>
> FTP ... File Transfer Protocol
>
> QED
>