[Top] [All Lists]

Re: SNPP - A Clarification

1993-09-06 11:33:38
At 12:27 PM 9/6/93 -0500, Allen Gwinn wrote:
SMTP.  I realize that SMTP could probably be modified to allow for a
specific type of message to be aimed directly at a pager (maybe?).

No modification to SMTP is necessary.  You just need the "pager" to accept
SMTP, just like you would need the "pager" to accept SNPP.

if the message originated from a UUCP site, while perfectly legal to
deliver it, the real time advantages that I seek would not be possible.

SNPP would not be possible AT ALL from a UUCP site.  So that fact that SMTP
couldn't be done in real time from a UUCP site is not meaningful.

do you think it would take to get a full mail gateway into place
and make modifications to SMTP to allow for immediate status reporting
of failed or delivered pages?

I don't see that any modifications to SMTP are necessary.
It is my understanding that you cannot immediately 
reject a message on the DATA portion of the message--only 
on information contained in the header (RCPT TO in this case).
Since you can't validate the page until after the DATA, you
can't immediately reject it.  Is this not the case?

It is not the case.  I know of two major mailers that do in fact accept or
reject messages based on the message data.  All it takes is for the
receiver SMTP to return something other than a 200-series error code in
response to the DATA command.

sndr: mail from:<someone>
rcvr: 200 ok
sndr: rcpt to:<pager>
rcvr: 200 ok
sndr: data
rcvr: 354 fine
sndr: to: pager
sndr: from: someone
sndr: x-pager-pin: 12345
sndr: Fire!  Fire!
sndr: .
rcvr: 555 Invalid PIN.  Page not accepted.


rcvr: 456 Paging network down.  Try later.


rcvr: 200 Page transmitted.

Steve Dorner, Qualcomm Inc.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>