* existing mail protocol thoughts (POP3 vs NNTP vs IMAP)
@ 2022-08-14 18:16 Eric Wong
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Eric Wong @ 2022-08-14 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: meta
Random thinking aloud on existing mail protocols...
POP3 doesn't support compression, so that makes it wasteful.
We also use a wonky account system to track deletes.
POP3 is not supported by lei, yet, and Net::POP3 has the same
performance problem as Net::NNTP and Mail::IMAPClient in that it
lacks pipelining support.
NNTP mandates extra headers (Path:, Newsgroup:, Xref:) which can
waste space and screw up exact dedupe and DKIM checking.
Compression support is still lacking in Net::NNTP[1].
IMAP supports compression, and doesn't add/modify existing
headers at all. So I think it's the least bad from that
perspective, but we need to slice it into multiple mailboxes
to avoid overloading clients.
JMAP doesn't have many widely available CLI client options in
distros, atm (e.g. mpop, getmail, offlineimap, isync/mbsync,
etc...)
[1] Net::NNTP COMPRESS support patch:
https://rt.cpan.org/Ticket/Display.html?id=129967
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2022-08-14 18:16 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2022-08-14 18:16 existing mail protocol thoughts (POP3 vs NNTP vs IMAP) Eric Wong
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).