Re: A suggestion for RFC1939

I very much agree with Paul. While this is a nice idea and how I would have 
chosen to do it at the start, there's so many POP clients out there that 
now that any implementation will have to support both forever. Adding a new 
way wouldn't save any body any work. It would just add. We'd never get away 
from having to do it the old way. Also note that UIDL is optional in the 
standard.

A similar annoyance is that TOP takes an argument in lines and LIST returns 
a value in bytes.

Both of these are because UIDL and TOP were late additions to the POP 
standard I believe.

LL

At 12:37 PM 3/24/00 +0530, Faheem wrote:
>Hi All,
>
>I don't understand why RFC1939 restricts to using message number with the 
>DELE command. Using the messageID (UIDL) with the DELE command would be a 
>lot more useful where the user agent can be sure of which message it is 
>deleting.
>
>In which case I'd rather  go ahead with the following sequence.
>DELE 20000304062907.AAA.e0081efb
>DELE 20000304062908.AAA.e0081efb
>DELE ...........
>..................
>QUIT
>
>So, can we please further our discussion on this if it seems to be helpful 
>to most user agents?
>
>Regards -Faheem
>
>Day Phone: +91+80+3312966
>Night Phone: +91+80+5546449
>Email: <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
>Time Zone: GMT +05:30