Olivier Poitrey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> _brian_d_foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>> sure you can. i suggest registering those names while we figure
>> out how to name the base class.
>
> Any idea ? I suggest Net::SMTP::Server::Base, not so bad is it ?
_brian_d_foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> sure you can. i suggest registering those names while we figure out
> how to name the base class.
Any idea ? I suggest Net::SMTP::Server::Base, not so bad is it ?
> Net::SMTP::Server looks like it hasn't been updated since 1999. you
> might be able to
_brian_d_foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Olivier Poitrey
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> My class implements 3 protocols : SMTP, ESMTP and LMTP. ESMTP inherit
>> from SMTP and LMTP from ESMTP (as describe in RFCs). So is
_brian_d_foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Is Mail::Server the right place for a network protocol class ?
>
> is this an application or a module?
No, it's just the server API.
> if you are writing an interface to the server side of a mail server,
> i think something like Net::ESMTP::Server is m
_brian_d_foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> > shouldn't this be Net::ESMTP and Net::LMTP then?
>>
>> Net::ESMTP and Net::LMTP are client-side protocols
>> implementations. Net::Server::Mail::* are server-side ones.
>
> ah, okay.
>
> i think this should be in Mail::* somewhere. perhaps Mail::Serv
_brian_d_foy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>> Other SMTPd implementations don't support useful ESMTP extensions
>> and the LMTP protocol.
>
> shouldn't this be Net::ESMTP and Net::LMTP then?
Net::ESMTP and Net::LMTP are client-side protocols
implementations. Net::Server::Mail::* are server
name: Olivier Poitrey
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
prefered id:RSOLIV
description:
I'm currently working on two modules for the apache web server that I would
like to share with the CPAN's community.
The first module make it easier to share data between children
