Hello MaXxX,
On Sun, 20 May 2001 at 00:08:50 GMT +0200 (which was 5/22/2001 5:08 AM
where you think I live) you response to Johannes Posel :
>>> that's what I've always done. Why would it be wrong for TB! to do
>>> the same to speed the connection up?
As Alexander Leschinsky said, connect to POPServer using more than one
using same username is against RFC (see RFC-1939, section 4,
Authorization State).
There is only one *TCP/IP* connection for port 110 from one ip
address, and after Authorization State, it must be lock). Telnet is
*not* TCP Protocol, so you can have more than one connection from
single ip.
I think, you agree with this :-)
>> I have an account on a server where the POP3d reacts badly to such an
>> attemp. He brings you back "-ERR you should not rush" :-) I will ask
>> what software it is. Anyway, I'll have a look at the POP3 RFC too...
This is what suppose to happen, due the client still in Authorization
State.
M> Please do.
M> But, for such servers it could be just an option, and of course it would
M> be off by default. I don't think it would do any harm for the users that
M> have (a) a bad network connection, and (b) a pipeline-capable server. On
M> the contrary, IMHO... :)
After Authorization State, Client will go to Transaction State.
You're right, there is no statement on RFC-1939 section 5 mentioned
about the command must sending on sequence and must wait POP3
response.
I didn't see POP3 server who support PipeLining (interest to developt
?), on most case POP3 server will store the client command on the
buffer (something like Latency Buffer) to force subsequence command
(which not response yet) to delay for a while. This mechanism to
prevent Buffer Overrun problem.
--
Best regards,
- Syafril -
--
______________________________________________________
Archives : <http://tbbeta.thebat.dutaint.com>
Moderators : <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Unsubscribe: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
You are subscribed as : archive@jab.org
