Actually, using ssh would obviate the need for an ftp-like second connection
protocol-mess for async notification. I think you could just forward 2
connections over the already-established link. So all connections from a
particular client would be guranteed to land on the same server, despite any
intermediary load balancers or firewalls.
Does this make sense?
-Peter
On Sat, Jan 15, 2000 at 10:57:00PM -0500, Russell Nelson wrote:
> Bruce Guenter writes:
> > - message state storage (read, replied to, forwarded, flagged, etc.)
> > seperate from content delivery (a "Status:" header line)
>
> I wonder if that couldn't be handled by the Maildir code writing
> Status: XXXXXXX as the very first line in each message? Then, you
> could change the status by opening the message file, read in the first
> N bytes, modify one of those characters to set the status, and write
> out those bytes again.
>
> > - explicit message size notification
>
> You get this already.
>
> > - message upload (for draft messages ...
>
> Couldn't you just send it to $USER-draft, and direct $USER-draft into
> a draft Maildir?
>
> > A challenge-response authentication system is a debatable need. On one
> > hand, with it you never send your pass phrase in the clear. On the
> > other, all your content is still in the clear, so it would be better to
> > assume a SSL link where necessary.
>
> I'd assume ssh, now that there's http://openssh.org .
>
> --
> -russ nelson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://russnelson.com
> Crynwr sells support for free software | PGPok | "Ask not what your country
> 521 Pleasant Valley Rd. | +1 315 268 1925 voice | can force other people to
> Potsdam, NY 13676-3213 | +1 315 268 9201 FAX | do for you..." -Perry M.
--
The 5 year plan:
In five years we'll make up another plan.
Or just re-use this one.
