Danny Amor's Online Library

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ Danny Amor's Online Library / Danny Amor's Online Library - Volume 1.iso / html / faqs / faq / lans / mail-protocols < prev

Wrap

Text File | 1995-07-25 | 33.0 KB | 601 lines

Subject: LAN Mail Protocols Summary Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,news.answers,comp.answers From: jmwobus@mailbox.syr.edu (John Wobus) Date: 7 Oct 1994 21:42:00 GMT Archive-name: LANs/mail-protocols Serving PCs and Workstations Using a Central Mail Server on an Internet ------- --- --- ------------ ----- - ------- ---- ------ -- -- -------- (Note: this message is prepared by John Wobus of Syracuse University, jmwobus@mailbox.syr.edu who welcomes updates and corrections; This version was last updated on 10/7/1994. A copy of this memo is placed in syr.edu's anonymous ftp area once a month under the path information/faqs/lan-mail-protocols). There are advantages to collecting mail destined to PCs and workstations on a central server, to be turned over to the PC or workstation on demand: - Your PC or workstation may be down quite a bit and less network bandwidth and less of the processing resouces of the sending computer are used if the computer receiving your mail is ready. - Some people use more than one PC or workstation to read mail. - A PC or workstation may not have the resources to store all the mail you receive. - It can make your e-mail address more like other users'. The easiest way to "implement" this is to run the central mail server like any multi-user system: let people sign on to it and use some mail utility. Then PC and workstation users can use "terminal sessions" to sign on to the central mail server and read their mail. This has the disadvantage of making the PC and workstation users learn and use the central mail server's procedures. SMTP, the "internet" mail protocol used to deliver mail between multi-user systems only supports mail transfer initiated by the sender (actually, it has a method to initiate reception, but the method didn't catch on and is not used). Other protocols have been devised to allow a workstation or PC to request transfer of mail, thus able to make use of a cnetral server. These include the published protocols POP (probably not used anymore), POP2, POP3, IMAP2, IMAP3 (not used), IMAP4 and DMSP. POP, POP2, POP3: These are rather minimal and are designed to be so. The three are similar but not enough alike to be interoperable. They are basically designed to identify the user by username and password, to transfer the mail from server to PC or workstation and to delete the mail transferred. It is assumed that SMTP will be used to send mail. Messages can be retrieved individually, but the only information you can get about a message without transferring it is its length in bytes-- useful for PCs with limited storage. POP3 has a number of extensions including Xtnd Xmit which allows clients to send mail through the POP3 session rather than using SMTP. Another extension is APOP which allows RSA MD5 encryption of passwords passed over the network. POP3 is now the most-used POP, but POP2 is still used. POP3 has a couple of optional extensions: one to avoid sending passwords, and one to aid in reading bulletin boards. IMAP2, IMAP3, IMAP4: The IMAP family is similar to the POP family, but also gives clients a way to do string searches through mail that still resides on the server. This is designed to allow the PC or workstation to be more selective as to which mail will be transferred. The POP protocols, on the other hand, are designed for simpler server software. IMAP2 is used quite a bit. IMAP3 is an incompatible offshoot that has not been implemented much. IMAP4 is a relatively recent extension of IMAP2 which makes the servers cogniscent of the MIME-structure of a message. IMAP4 also extends IMAP to have some of DMSP's features. IMSP (Interactive Mail Support Protocol) is a protocol which is being developed to compliment IMAP4 by offering related e-mail services beyond the scope of IMAP4. It includes the ability to subscribe find & subscribe to bulletin boards, mailboxes, and to find and search address books. DMSP (aka PCMAIL): PCs and workstations can use this protocol to both send and receive mail. The system is designed around the idea that each user can own more than one workstation; however, the system doesn't seem to handle the idea of a "public workstation" very well. The PCs and workstations are assumed to hold state information about the mail, a directory so to speak, and when the PC or workstation is connected to the server, this directory is updated to "reality". Who uses these protocols? These protocols were designed and implemented mostly by Internet-connected universities with some participation by other Internet-connected research institutions. They were certainly devised to handle the type of electronic mail that universities must do. A typical site has probably 10 to 10,000 desktop machines and has an Internet connection and also runs Unix, giving them the Unix sysadmin expertise that makes running a Unix-based server attractive. Most of the servers listed here run under Unix though some run under other large systems and as time goes on, we are seeing more servers that run on PCs and Macintoshes. Disadvantages: there are a number of disadvantages associated with the use of these protocols: -since these methods do not dominate the industry, software using these methods is often incompatible with other useful and/or well-known software. A couple of examples are: -Use of mail-enabled applications on PCs (there is no fundimental reason that mail software using these protcols can't provide the API used by mail-enabled applications, but in general this hasn't come about yet) -Use of the usual Unix mail readers & the Unix .forward files. -since the server is holding mail for the person, the person can use the server for storage. This leaves the potential for all the disk-space problems inherent in shared disks: people hogging disk-space or forgetting to clean up, etc. -sizing the server: a perennial question people ask is "How big a machine do I need to serve my campus (or department, or whatever)". Naturally no one can give a straight answer because it depends upon so many factors. Issue of Remote Access: Modern commercial e-mail packages typically have features designed to assist in remote access of ones e-mail. Features include: -ability to download mail through a modem -ability to synchronize two different systems which you are using to read your e-mail by plugging them together. Any method of reading e-mail using PCs or Macintoshes can be used remotely via the "PCanywhere(tm)" method, e.g. by dialing up your own office PC and using one of the several kinds of software that allow you to control your PC over the phone. Also, any LAN-based method can be used by using one of the several methods of providing the same protocol support over dialup lines as are on LANs (SLIP or PPP for the above-mentioned, TCP/IP-based protocols, ARA for Appletalk-based protocols, etc, and sometimes using two different protocols, one incapsulated in the other) under the constraint that any operations that use the network will be much slower. Also, POP3 is often used directly over modems (for example, Eudora can be used in this manner). The ideal protocol for remote access would not penalize the user for the much slower communications speed (usually slower by a factor of 100: note that a lot of LAN-based software was written without regard to minimizing the necessary communication, thus is really hurt by such slow speeds), yet would allow the same software to run both remotely and locally, with a wonderful user interface. It would also not be overly expensive in communications equipment or services. This is a difficult set of objectives and the above-three protocols can achieve some of them for some users, but what they actually achieve depends a lot on the user's pattern of e-mail usage. If a user reads just a small amount of mail, then we would not worry about the length of time necessary to download it remotely with POP3, but if the person receives a lot of mail, but just wants to read a small amount of it at home, then with IMAP2, they could pick and choose what to read, eliminating some download time. If someone is paying for the telephone line time (possibly the user if it is a long distance call; in any case, the institution pays a monthly fee for each line it offers, which is dependent upon how many users it is serving, how often they call, and how long their calls are) then IMAP2's natural method of usage which requires the phone call to remain while a user is reading, poking around, sending, and rearranging mail can be much more costly than using POP3 if one call is used to quickly download all the mail and another later call is used to send any replies. Thus with POP3 a user might have two 1 minute calls before and after a 30 minute e-mail session instead of keeping the call for 30 minutes with IMAP2, and each phone line the institution offers could be serving 15 times as many such users who would each pay a lot less in long-distance phone bills. Note that with the advent of multimedia mail (see MIME below) whose messages can be very large, it is possible that downloading even one message that you end up not reading remotely could ruin such a nice-sounding scenario. MIME: MIME (Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions) is a relatively new Internet standard for the format for messages with multiple parts, and with non-ASCII data. Any client that can import or export files can use MIME in a clumsy way if you have a program to create and/or decode a MIME message. Some clients have built-in features to do this. Client-server mail protocols generally only deal with entire messages, and can retrieve MIME messages as well as any other messages since MIME was carefully designed to be transparent to existing mail systems. However, IMAP4 has features to allow retrieval of individual parts of MIME-encoded messages. The chart below lists whether a package has MIME support. Servers for protocols that don't offer any special MIME features are marked na for Not Applicable since they need do nothing for users to use MIME. All IMAP4 servers can also do this, but the chart lists whether they include explicit MIME support. Approaches not covered by this memo: proprietary protocols; file sharing; APIs; X.400. Vendors can invent their own protocols similar to those listed above, and some have. LAN e-mail can also be implemented using file sharing, e.g. using NFS to allow separate Unix workstations to share the same mail spool area just as if it were mail being stored on one system. If the applications are written so that they are careful to lock files correctly, then this works. An advantage is that any network file protocol can be used and the e-mail application can be somewhat independent of the file protocol. For example, Unix systems could use either AFS or NFS. Pegasus is a PC & Mac application that uses Novell file service to do something similar. Specifications for client-server interaction consist of the file service protocol along with the server directory structures & conventions used for storing e-mail. A very popular approach with commercial vendors is the use of APIs. The client talks to the server using an API (Applications Programming Interface), i.e., a set of subroutine/procedure library call definitions for a library providing subroutines/procedures to send, receive, and manipulate e-mail. With the use of any remote procedure call mechanism, the client can be located on a different computer from the server. This allows some mixing and matching of RPC mechanisms, underlying protocol stacks and APIs: e.g., a vendor defines an API, and it can be run over IPX or TCP/IP, in each case over the protocol stack's RPC mechanism. There are a number of APIs now being pushed by vendors: MAPI (Microsoft); VIM (Lotus); AOCE (Apple); SMF (Novell, part of MHS). These API's have been the basis for numerous mail-enabled applications: e.g. a word processor that allows you to send or receive documents through e-mail simply uses one of these APIs allowing it to communicate with any server supporting the same API. Specifications for client-server interaction consist of the protocol stack up to the RPC protocol, then the API itself. Note that though the API approach in combination with remote procedure calls allows one to implement client-server e-mail without the use of the protocols covered by this document (IMAP, POP, etc), that there is no theoretical reason why such APIs can't be used in an IMAP or POP environment. The necessary software would be a "driver" or piece of "middleware" that provides the APIs calls to mail-enabled applications and uses POP, IMAP, or whatever over a LAN to reach a server. The advantages/disadvantages of such an approach as compared to the use of RPCs is open to debate. X.400 is the message transport defined for use between telecommunications vendors and customers by the international consortium of national standards bodies known as ISO. It roughly corresponds to the Internet's SMTP and RFC822 header format. A consortium of X.400 vendors (XAPIA) have developed an API for X.400 applications called CMC. More about the protocols: Name: Post Office Protocol, Version 2 Nickname: POP2 Document: RFC 937 (Butler et al, February 1985) TCP-port: 109 Status: Functionally replaced by incompatible POP3 but still used some Name: Post Office Protocol, Version 3 Nickname: POP3 Document: RFC 1460 (Rose, May 1993) TCP-port: 110 (109 also often used) Status: In use Sites: UC Irvine, MIT Name: Post Office Protocol, Version 3 Extended Service Offerings Nickname: POP3 XTND Document: RFC 1082 (Rose, November 1988) Name: Distributed Mail Service Protocol Nickname: DMSP, Pcmail Document: RFC 1056 (Lambert, June 1988) TCP-port: 158 Status: Used very little Sites: MIT Name: Interactive Mail Access Protocol, Version 2 Nickname: IMAP2 Document: RFC 1176 (Crispin, August 1990) TCP-port: 143 Status: In use, being replaced by upward-compatible IMAP4 Sites: Stanford, U Washington Name: Interactive Mail Access Protocol, Version 3 Nickname: IMAP3 Document: RFC 1203 (Rice, February 1991) TCP-port: 220 Status: Historical, not used Sites: Stanford Name: Internet Message Access Protocol, Version 4 Nickname: IMAP4 Document: Draft RFC: draft-ietf-imap-imap4-05.txt (Crispin, August 1994) TCP-port: 143 Status: Draft RFC for IMAP2 replacement, standards track Sites: U Washington Name: Interactive Mail Support Protocol Nickname: IMSP Document: Draft RFC: ? (Myers, August 1993) Status: Experimental Sites: Carnegie Mellon Note: The "I" in IMAP used to stand for "Interactive". Now it stands for "Internet" and the "M" stands for "Message" rather than "Mail". Also, Internet drafts are available at ds.internic.net, munnari.oz.au, and nic.nordu.net in directory internet-drafts. IMAP4 used to be called IMAP2bis. Other sources of similar information: By anonymous ftp from ftp.cac.washington.edu: imap/imap.vs.pop -outlines differences in more detail imap/imap.software -list of IMAP software mail/draft-ietf-imap-model-00.txt -informational Mailing lists: pop@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu imap@cac.washington.edu CW-EMAIL@EARNCC.EARN.NET By anonymous ftp from rtfm.mit.edu: This memo comp.os.msdos.mail-news FAQ Memo Implementations: Prot Computer Implementation End MIME Source ------ ---------- ------------------- ---- ---- -------------------------------- DMSP PC pc-epsilon (3.1) clnt ? allspice.lcs.mit.edu DMSP PC pc-netmail (3.1) clnt ? allspice.lcs.mit.edu DMSP PC pc-reader clnt ? allspice.lcs.mit.edu DMSP Unix Pcmail 3.1 reposit. srvr na allspice.lcs.mit.edu DMSP Unix/EMACS Pcmail 4.2 clnt ? allspice.lcs.mit.edu DMSP PC PC/TCP 2.3 clnt ? FTP Software 8/4/94 DMSP OS/2 PC/TCP clnt ? FTP Software DMSP OS/2 TCP/2 clnt ? Essex Systems DMSP OS/2 TCP/2 SERVER PACK srvr na Essex Systems DMSP OS/2 TCP/2 ADV CLIENT clnt ? Essex Systems IMAPx Macintosh MacMS 2.2.1 clnt no sumex-aim.stanford.edu 11/7/93 IMAP24 Macintosh Mailstrom 1.04 clnt no sumex-aim.stanford.edu 11/7/93 IMAP24 Macintosh Mailstrom 2 (b?) clnt yes sumex-aim.stanford.edu 10/19/93 IMAP2 Macintosh PathWay clnt no The Wollongong Group 2/25/94 IMAP2 Unix/X PathWay clnt no The Wollongong Group 2/25/94 POP3 Macintosh PathWay clnt no The Wollongong Group 2/25/94 POP3 Unix/X PathWay clnt no The Wollongong Group 2/25/94 IMAP? Macintosh ECSMail Mac (alpha) clnt yes ISA 11/7/93 IMAP2b Macintosh ECSMail 3.0 (beta) clnt yes ISA 10/4/94 POP2 Macintosh MacPOP 1.5 clnt ? trident.arc.nasa.gov POP2 MS-DOS PC POP 2.1 clnt ? trident.arc.nasa.gov POP3 Macintosh TCP/Connect II clnt ? InterCon Systems Corp POP3 MS-WIN TCP/Connect II f W clnt yes InterCon Systems Corp 7/8/94 POP3 NeXT EasyMail clnt yes ftp.cac.washington.edu 11/7/93 IMAP2 NeXT MailManager srvr yes ftp.cac.washington.edu 11/7/93 IMAP2 TOPS20 MAPSER srvr na ? 11/7/93 IMAP2 Unix imap kit srvr na ftp.cac.washington.edu 2/1/94 POP23 Unix imap kit srvr na ftp.cac.washington.edu 2/1/94 IMAP24 Unix Pine 3.90 clnt yes ftp.cac.washington.edu 9/23/94 IMAP24 MS-DOSl+ PC-Pine 3.90 clnt yes ftp.cac.washington.edu 9/23/94 POP23 Unix popclient 2.21 clnt ? csugrad.cs.vt.edu 4/5/94 IMAP2 VMS Pine 3.88 port clnt yes vms.huji.ac.il 4/12/94 IMAP? VMS Pine in PMDF 4.3 clnt ? Innosoft 4/1/94 IMAP2 VMS ImapD port srvr yes vms.huji.ac.il 4/12/94 POP3 Macintosh6 Eudora 1.3.1 clnt no ftp.qualcomm.com 7/14/94 POP3 Macintosh7 Eudora 1.4.2 clnt yes ftp.qualcomm.com 5/10/94 POP3 Mac7/PM7 Eudora 1.4.3 clnt yes ftp.qualcomm.com 9/13/94 POP3 Mac7/PM7 Eudora 1.5 clnt yes ftp.qualcomm.com 9/13/94 POP3mr Macintosh7 Eudora 2.0.2 clnt yes Qualcomm 5/10/94 POP3mr Mac7/PM7 Eudora 2.0.3 clnt yes Qualcomm 9/13/94 POP3mrkMac7/PM7 Eudora 2.1 clnt yes Qualcomm 9/13/94 POP3 MS-WINw Eudora 1.4 clnt yes ftp.qualcomm.com 7/14/94 POP3 MS-WINw Eudora 2.0.2 clnt yes Qualcomm 5/10/94 POP3 MS-WINw Eudora 2.0.3 (test) clnt yes Qualcomm 9/13/94 POP3 MS-WINw Eudora 2.1 (future) clnt yes Qualcomm 9/13/94 IMAP2 Unix imapd 3.1/Stanf srvr na sumex-aim.stanford.edu* IMAP2b Unix imapd/UWash srvr ? ftp.cac.washington.edu 10/4/94 IMAP2 Unix/X Ximap 0.7.2 clnt ? sumex-aim.stanford.edu IMAP? Unix/X XLView 1.22 clnt yes sumex-aim.stanford.edu IMAP? Unix/X Palm (in dev) clnt ? UMiami 11/7/93 IMAP? Unix/X Cyrus (dev on hold) clnt yes CMU 10/4/94 IMAP24 Unix Cyrus 1.0 beta srvr yes ftp.andrew.cmu.edu 10/4/94 POP3 Unix Cyrus 1.0 beta srvr na ftp.andrew.cmu.edu 10/4/94 IMAP4 ? Futr Andrew Msg Sys ? ? Carnegie-Mellon 9/20/94 IMAP? Xrx Lsp Mc MM-D clnt no Stanford U 11/7/93 IMAP? Xrx Lsp Mc Yes-Way clnt yes Stanford U 11/7/93 IMAP2 MS-WINw ECSMail 2.1 clnt ? ISA, ftp.srv.ualberta.ca 2/25/94 IMAP2 MS-WINw ECSMail 2.2 (beta) clnt yes ISA, info.asu.edu 2/25/94 IMAP2b MS-WINw ECSMail 3.0 (beta) clnt yes ISA 10/4/94 IMAP2 Unix/XM ECSMail Mo (in dev) clnt yes ISA 11/7/93 IMAP2b Solaris ECSMail 3.0 (beta) clnt yes ISA 10/4/94 IMAP2 MS-DOS ECSMail DOS(in dev) clnt yes ISA 11/7/93 IMAP? Unix UMAIL clnt no umail@umail.umd.edu 11/7/93 IMAP? Unix MS clnt no ftp.cac.washington.edu 11/7/93 IMAP2 MS-WIN PathWay clnt no The Wollongong Group 2/25/94 POP3 MS-WIN PathWay clnt no The Wollongong Group 2/25/94 POP? MS-WIN PathWay Access 3.0 clnt ? The Wollongong Group 8/4/94 IMAP? NT ECSMail 2.1 clnt yes ISA, ftp.srv.ualberta.ca 11/7/93 IMAP? OS/2 ECSMail OS/2(in dev)clnt yes ISA 11/7/93 IMAP2 Amiga Pine 3.8x (in dev) clnt yes UWashington 11/7/93 POP23 Macintosh POPMail 2.09 clnt ? boombox.micro.umn.edu 12/3/93 IMAP2 Macintosh POPMail 2.09 clnt ? boombox.micro.umn.edu 12/3/93 POP2 Macintosh MailStop 1.1.3 srvr na boombox.micro.umn.edu 1/18/94 POP3r Macintosh MailShare 1.0(beta) srvr na glenn.anderson@stonebow.otago.ac.nz 8/16/94 POP2 MS-DOS LifeLine Mail 2.0 clnt ? SunSelect 12/7/93 POP23 MS-DOS SelectMail 2.1 clnt ? SunSelect 1/25/94 POP2 MS-DOSk ? srvr na ucsd.edu POP2 MS-DOSk net091b srvr na boombox.micro.umn.edu 12/3/93 POP3 MS-DOSk pop3nos v1.86 srvr na boombox.micro.umn.edu 12/3/93 POP3 MS-DOSk pop3serv srvr na biochemistry.crwu.edu POP3 MS-DOSk nos11c-a.exe srvr na biochemistry.bioc.cwru.edu 9/16/94 POP2 MS-DOS MD/DOS-IP clnt ? U Maryland POP2 MS-DOS PC/TCP clnt ? FTP Software POP2 OS/2 PC/TCP for OS/2 clnt ? FTP Software 11/2/93 POP23 MS-WIN BW-Connect clnt no Beame & Whiteside 8/4/94 POP3 MS-WIN Air Series 2.06 clnt no Spry 7/7/94 IMAP? MS-WIN Air Mail ? ? AIR Co. Ltd 9/20/94 IMAP? MS-WIN EMBLA ? ? ICL ProSystems 9/20/94 POP23 MS-DOSp POPMail/PC 3.2.2 clnt ? boombox.micro.umn.edu 1/11/94 IMAP? MS-DOSp POPMail/PC 3.2.2 clnt ? boombox.micro.umn.edu 1/11/94 POP23 MS-DOSp Minuet 1.0b16 (beta)clnt no boombox.micro.umn.edu 8/16/94 POP? MS-WINls TCPMail clnt ? Pinesoft (pinesoft@net.com) POP2 Unix U Minn popd 1.5c srvr na boombox.micro.umn.edu 11/19/93 POP2 Unix USC-ISI popd srvr na trident.arc.nasa.gov POP2 Unix imapd/ipop2d srvr na ftp.cac.washington.edu POP? Unix zmail clnt ? Z-Code Software (info@z-code.com) POP? Unix zync ? clnt ? Z-Code Software (info@z-code.com) 9/23/94 POP? Unix ?mush clnt ? I heard a rumor 2/4/94 POP23k UnixX xmh clnt ? ftp.x.org 2/15/94 POP23k UnixX exmh clnt ? ? POP23k UnixX dxmail/mh clnt ? DEC POP? Unix pop-perl-1.0 clnt ? sunsite.unc.edu 9/13/94 POP2 VM FAL srvr na IBM POP2 MS-WIN IBM TCP/IP for DOS clnt no IBM 7/7/94 POP2 VM ? srvr na Texas Tech University POP? VM ?POPD srvr na vmd.cso.uiuc.edu 2/4/94 POP2 OS/2 TCP/2 SERVER PACK srvr na Essex Systems POP2 VMS MULTINet srvr na TGV, Inc. POP2 HP3000/MPE NetMail/3000 srvr na 3K Associates POP3k Macintosh Eudora 1.3a8k clnt ? ftp.brown.edu 8/19/94 POP3 Macintosh MacPOP (Berkeley) clnt ? ftp.cc.berkeley.edu POP3k Macintosh TechMail 2.0 clnt ? net-dist.mit.edu POP3 Macintosh MacMH clnt ? jessica.stanford.edu/info POP3 Macintosh VersaTerm Link clnt ? Synergy Software 10/8/93 POP3 Macintosh LeeMail 2.0.2 (shw) clnt ? chs.cusd.claremont.edu 10/12/93 POP3 Mac7pro Mail*Link Internet clnt yes StarNine Technologies 2/18/94 POP3t Unix popper-1.7 srvr na ftp.cc.berkeley.edu 10/15/93 POP3k Unix popper-1.7k srvr na ftp.brown.edu 10/19/94 POP3 Unix popper-1.831 srvr na ftp.cc.berkeley.edu 11/3/93 POP3 Solaris2.X popper-1.831/uore srvr na ftp.uoregon.edu 10/19/93 POP3 Solaris2.X popper-1.9 srvr na ftp.chalmers.se 7/26/94 POP3 Unix popper-1.831/qual srvr na ftp.qualcomm.com 11/16/93 POP3 Unix qpop-2.1.1 srvr na ftp.qualcomm.com 9/2/94 POP3 Unix popper-1.8u2Q1/Q2 srvr na ? 1/11/94 POP3 Unix popperQC3 srvr na QualComm 6/21/94 POP23k Unix mh-6.8 (UCI RandMH) both yes ftp.ics.uci.edu 8/30/94 POP23krUnix mh-6.8.3 (UCI RndMH)both yes ftp.ics.uci.edu 9/27/94 POP3 Linux miniclient clnt ? sunsite.unc.edu 8/30/94 POP3 Unix imapd/ipop3d srvr na ftp.cac.washington.edu POP3 Unix pop3d 1.004 srvr na ftp.ucdavis.edu 12/3/93 POP2 Unix pop2d 1.001 srvr na ftp.ucdavis.edu 12/3/93 POP3 Unix mush 7.2.5 clnt ? ? 1/4/94 POP3t MS-DOSnpo PC/TCP clnt ? FTP Software POP3 OS/2 PC/TCP for OS/2 clnt ? FTP Software 11/2/93 POP3 MS-DOS TechMail(future) clnt ? ? POP3 MS-WINl TechMail for Wind. clnt ? net-dist.mit.edu 2/25/94 POP3 OS/2l TechMail for Wind. clnt ? net-dist.mit.edu 2/25/94 POP3 MS-DOS ? clnt ? logos.ucs.indiana.edu POP3 MS-DOSp NUPop 1.03 clnt no ftp.acns.nwu.edu 11/5/93 POP3 MS-DOSp NUPop 2.02 clnt no ftp.acns.nwu.edu 1/18/94 POP3 MS-DOSp NUPop 2.10 (alpha) clnt yes ftp.acns.nwu.edu 6/10/94 POP23 MS-WINw Trumpet clnt no ftp.psychol.utas.edu.au 7/7/94 POP3 MS-WIN Pceudora clnt ? ftp.qualcomm.com 9/24/93 POP3 MS-WINw WinPMail 1.1 (test) clnt no David Harris 11/15/93 POP3 MS-DOSp POPgate (Pmail gw) clnt ? risc.ua.edu 4/1/94 POP3 MS-DOSl PMPOP (Pmail gw) clnt ? risc.ua.edu 4/1/94 POP3x MS-WIN WinQVT (2.1) clnt ? QPC Software (shareware) 7/12/94 POP3 MS-WINp wnqvtnet 3.0 clnt ? ftp.cica.indiana.edu POP3 MS-WINp wnqvtnet 3.9 clnt ? ftp.cica.indiana.edu 2/1/94 POP3 MS-WIN Open Systems Mail clnt ? Pine Software POP3 MS-WIN? IMAIL both ? Ipswitch 7/12/94 POP3 VMS IUPOP3 v1.7 srvr na ftp.indiana.edu 7/25/94 POP3 VMS IUPOP3 v1.7-CMU-TEK srvr na ftp.indiana.edu 7/25/94 POP3 VMS IUPOP3 v1.8-1 srvr na ftp.indiana.edu 7/25/94 POP3 MS-DOS POP3 0.9 clnt na ftp.indiana.edu 7/25/94 POP3 VMS MULTINet both ? TGV, Inc. POP3 VMS PMDF 4.2 srvr na Innosoft 1/7/94 IMAP? VMS PMDF 4.2 srvr ? Innosoft 11/7/93 IMAP? MS-DOS PMDF E-mail Interc clnt ? Innosoft 3/2/94 IMAP? Macintosh PMDF E-mail Interc clnt ? Innosoft 3/2/94 IMAP4 SolarisX Roam (Future) clnt ? Sun 8/9/94 IMAP4 SolarisX imapd (Future) clnt ? Sun 8/9/94 IMAP? UnixX ? clnt ? mtm@camis.stanford.edu 8/9/94 POP3 OS/2 TCP/2 SERVER PACK srvr na Essex Systems POP3 OS/2 TCP/2 ADV CLIENT clnt ? Essex Systems POP? MS-DOS UCDmail clnt ? ucdavis.ucdavis.edu POP? MS-DOS PC POP clnt ? ?Bill Schweickert/Sterling Fed POP23 MS-WINnpo Super-TCP for W e.0 clnt yes Frontier Technologies 6/10/94 POP? MS-WINnpo Super-TCP for W e.0 srvr yes Frontier Technologies 7/12/94 POP? MS-WINw Windows ELM clnt ? lister.cc.ic.ac.uk 7/12/94 POP23 MS-DOSni ChameleonNFS both ? NetManage 8/4/94 POP23 MS-DOSni Chameleon beta clnt yes NetManage POP23 MS-WINw Internet Chameleon clnt yes NetManage 7/12/94 POP? Macintosh MEWS clnt ? ? POP? Macintosh byupopmail clnt ? ? POP? VM ? srvr na TTUVM1 ? Macintosh Hypermail ? ? ? ? OS/2 lamailpop ? ? ftp-so2.cdrom.com POP3 MS-DOSs pcelm clnt ? lister.cc.ic.ac.uk 1/25/94 POP3 MS-WINs winelm clnt ? lister.cc.ic.ac.uk 1/25/94 POP3 Netware Mercury 1.11 srvr na risc.ua.edu 2/4/94 POP3 MS-WINw IMail srvr na Ipswitch 7/15/94 POP3 MS-WIN Pegasus/Win 1.13(b) clnt yes ? 3/9/94 POP3 MS-WIN Pegasus/Win 1.2 clnt yes ? 7/19/94 POP23 MS-WINw Mail-IT 2 clnt yes mail-it@unipalm.co.uk 7/12/94 POP23 Unix Mail-IT 2 clnt yes mail-it@unipalm.co.uk 9/9/94 POP? MS-WIN RFD Mail 1.22 clnt ? ftp.std.com 7/19/94 POP? MS-WIN RFD Mail 1.23 clnt ? ftp.std.com 9/16/94 POP3 MS-WINw ws_gmail srvr na buckshot.usma.edu 9/16/94 POP3 MS-WINw IMAIL srvr na Ipswitch 9/16/94 ------ ---------- ------------------- ---- ---- -------------------------------- Appendix: Some other packages for desktop systems ------ ---------- ------------------- ---- ---- -------------------------------- ? MS-DOSs CMM peer ? Cinetic Systems 1/25/94 ? MS-DOSs WinMail 1.1a peer ? Obsolete SMTP Macintosh LeeMail 1.2.4 peer ? Shareware, laf@mitre.org SMTP Macintosh LeeMail 2.0.2 (shw) peer ? chs.cusd.claremont.edu 10/12/93 SMTP MS-DOSni ChameleonNFS peer ? NetManage 2/25/94 SMTP MS-WINw ws_gmail peer ? buckshot.usma.edu 5/26/94 uucp Macintosh FernMail peer ? Shareware, dplatt@snulbug.mtview.ca.us prop Macintosh MacPost both ? ftp.lu.se 10/19/93 uucp Macintosh Eudora >1.3.1 peer yes ftp.qualcomm.com 5/10/94 uucp Macintosh UUPC peer ? dplatt@snulbug.mtview.ca.us uucp Macintosh gnuucp peer ? jim@fpr.com uucp MS-DOS waffle peer ? ? uucp MS-DOS UUPC peer ? ? fshare MS-Windows Pegasus/Win 1.02 clnt ? risc.ua.edu 12/3/93 fshare MS-Windows Pegasus/Win 1.11(a) clnt ? ? 7/14/94 fshare MS-Windows Pegasus/Win 1.13(b) clnt yes ? 3/9/94 fshare MS-DOS Pegasus/DOS 3.11(a) clnt yes risc.ua.edu 7/14/94 fshare Macintosh Pegasus/Mac 2.0.5 clnt ? risc.ua.edu 7/14/94 SMTP MS-DOS Charon gway ? risc.ua.edu 10/15/93 Waffle MS-WIN Boxer clnt ? ftp.halcyon.com 12/3/93 ? MS-? pcelm clnt ? simtel 12/3/93 ? MS-? elm-pc clnt ? lister.cc.ic.ac.uk 12/3/93 SMTP MS-WINw Internt Ex for cc:m gway yes IMA 1/31/94 SMTP Netware Mercury 1.11 gway ? risc.ua.edu 2/4/94 ? Macintosh PowerMail clnt ? Apple 2/18/94 SMTP OS/2 PC/TCP v1.3 peer ? FTP Software 2/18/94 MAPI MS-DOS? Microsoft Mail clnt ? Microsoft 3/2/94 ? Macintosh Microsoft Mail clnt ? Microsoft 3/15/94 VIM DOSWINMac cc:mail clnt ? Lotus 3/15/94 MHS/G DOSWINMac DaVinci eMAIL clnt ? DaVinci 2/24/94 P7uucp DOSWINMac OpenMail clnt ? HP 3/2/94 ? DOSWINMac WordPerfect Office clnt ? WordPerfect Crop. 3/15/94 ? DOSMac MailWorks clnt ? DEC 3/2/94 MHS/G DOSWIN BeyondMail 2.0 clnt ? Beyond, Inc./Banyon 3/2/94 ? DOSWINMac Quickmail 2.6 clnt ? CE Software 3/15/94 ? DOSWINMac Lotus Notes clnt ? Lotus 3/15/94 FCP Macintosh FirstClass 2.5 clnt no SoftArc 7/12/94 FCP MS-WIN FirstClass 2.5 clnt no SoftArc 7/12/94 FCP Macintosh FirstClass 2.5 srvr no SoftArc 7/12/94 MHS Macintosh FirstClass/MHS gway no SoftArc 7/12/94 UUCP Macintosh FirstClass/UUCP gway no SoftArc 7/12/94 MAPI MS-WINw Mail-IT 2 clnt yes mail-it@unipalm.co.uk 7/12/94 MAPI ? ECSmail ? (future) clnt ? ISA 10/7/94 MAPI ? zmail (future) clnt ? Z-Code Software (info@z-code.com) VIM ? ECSmail ? (future) clnt ? ISA 10/7/94 MAPI MS-WIN Air Mail ? ? AIR Co. Ltd 10/7/94 SMTP MS-WINw Mail-IT 2 peer yes mail-it@unipalm.co.uk 7/12/94 ? MS-WINw Panda ? ? ftp.cica.indiana.edu 7/12/94 PSS MS-Win pMail 3.0 clnt no CommTouch 9/27/94 PSS MS-DOS pMail 3.0 clnt no CommTouch 9/27/94 ------ ---------- ------------------- ---- ---- -------------------------------- Other issues: (1) What are the common extensions to POP3 and which clients/servers support them? POP3k - Kerberos POP3a - AFS Kerberos POP3x - ? POP3t - xtnd xmit facility--allows client to send mail through additional POP commands, thus allowing server to verify/log source of mail. POP3r - APOP POP3m - ? (2) What DOS protocol stacks are supported? MS-DOSm - Lan Manager MS-DOSn - NDIS Drivers MS-DOSl - Lan Workplace for Dos MS-DOSs - Sun PCNFS MS-DOSp - Packet Drivers MS-DOSo - ODI Drivers MS-DOSi - IPXLink MS-DOSf - FTP Software PC/TCP MS-DOSk - KA9Q I think MS-WIN? - similar MS-WINw - WinSock compliaint (3) Other notes IMAPx - MacMS's own dialect of IMAP. IMAP2b - IMAP2bis: name applied to various improved versions of IMAP2. This development effort culminated in IMAP4. IMAP24 - IMAP2 or IMAP4 fshare - uses file sharing. MAPI - Microsoft's Messaging API VIM - Lotus's Vendor Independent Messaging API CMC - XAPIA's Common Message Calls API AOCE - Apple Open Collaborative Environment FCP - Softarc's proprietary client-server protocol. Unix/X - X Windows based Unix/XM - Motif based PSS - PROFS Screen Scraper (4) IMAP/MAPI adaptors: Wollongong's Pathway Access 7/12/94 mail-it@unipalm.co.uk's Mail-IT 7/12/94 ------ ----------- ------------------- ------- --------------------------------