Re: Extended RETR - Draft posted

[Anders Rundegren <anders@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is there anyone having additional comments except what has already been
said?

I will revise the draft based on the feedback I've been getting so far.
However, this will not happen until next weekend due to extreme workload
at work.

> > Example:
> >
> > Message number is '1'.
> > Message size is 217,743 bytes.
> > Offset 113,435 starts with a '.'.
> >
> > Lets assume our transfer got interrupted after 113,434 bytes. Now, the
> 
> To illustrate the case of having to byte-stuff, you'd want the
> transfer to be interrupted after 113,435 bytes.

Yes, true, sorry about that...

> > > "       a) Less consumption of bandwidth
> > >         b) Less resources used on the server-side
> > >         c) Less time used online for the client"

I didn't put them in any specific order though.

> To allow for a simple seek, we would need to define that offsets are
> into the message as stored in a BSD-style mailbox.

I guess I should explore other systems. ;)

// Anders