| To: | Joerg Schilling <yyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: uucp usage survey |
| From: | Albert Cahalan <yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Fri, 29 Oct 2004 12:43:32 -0400 |
| Cc: | Austin Group list <yyyyyyyyyyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, yyyyyy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx |
| References: | <1041029054407.ZM20455@skye.rdg.opengroup.org> <41824E0C.nailE8C51QHVH@burner> |
On Fri, 2004-10-29 at 10:05, Joerg Schilling wrote: > As UUCP includes UUCP over TCP, there is a reason to use it anytime > you like to have polled connections insted of pushed connections. > > Think e.g. of the case where you have a DSL connection that gets > new IP numbers enforced each day by the provider and you don't have > dyndns, then you cannot let the remote sendmail push to your > system. It however works if you poll a provider with MX record for you > that supports UUCP polls for you. Isn't this what ESMTP gives you? I think that's the name. Anyway, I'm sure there is an SMTP varient that can be used for polling. Of course, the fetchmail program has many other ways to grab email, even when dealing with multiple users. Something like fetchmail could be standardized. :-) Finding a place that would support uucp is almost as easy as finding a place to get your wig powdered. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Defect in XBD 4.10 Memory Synchronization, Dave Butenhof (t) |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Defect in XBD 4.10 Memory Synchronization, Ted Baker |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: uucp usage survey, Joerg Schilling |
| Next by Thread: | Re: uucp usage survey, Andries Brouwer |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [All Lists] |