How fast should 'send b??
[1/10] from: robert::lancaster::opennw::com at: 5-Jul-2001 14:20
Sending Email, using 'send, can take some time...
eg
>> print now send [to--myself--my--company] "hello:" print now
5-Jul-2001/14:01:50+12:00
5-Jul-2001/14:02:10+12:00
== 20 secs
Is this slowness REBOL? ( Thinks... Not... )
Or is it cos I'm on a coporate LAN using an MS Exchange Mail server.
Seeing as I'm not familiar with SMTP I thought I'd ask the list; How long
should it take?
[2/10] from: gschwarz:netconnect:au at: 5-Jul-2001 13:45
Should be much quicker than 20 seconds.
I use a script that makes a doc and e-mail it to myself and the times would
be less than 1 second.
Regards,
Greg
[3/10] from: larry:ecotope at: 4-Jul-2001 20:43
Hi Robert
On my 100mbps LAN using a standard pop/smtp server and win98, I get:
>> print now send [larry--ecotope--com] "hello:" print now
4-Jul-2001/20:34:55-7:00
4-Jul-2001/20:34:56-7:00
So about 1 second to do the send.
Looks like Exchange is a little slow.
-Larry
[4/10] from: brett:codeconscious at: 5-Jul-2001 13:50
Sydney ISP, US Server.
First attempt.
5-Jul-2001/13:35:36+10:00
5-Jul-2001/13:35:38+10:00
Second attempt using now/precise
>> t0: now/precise send system/user/email "hello:" print now/precise/time -
t0/time
0:00:05.698
Third attempt
>> t0: now/precise send system/user/email "hello:" print now/precise/time -
t0/time
0:00:05.347
Probably your server. :)
Should be fast on a lan, though depends on how busy your server is.
Brett.
[5/10] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 5-Jul-2001 6:20
----- Original Message -----
From: "Larry Palmiter" <[larry--ecotope--com]>
To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 5:43 AM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: How fast should 'send b??
> Hi Robert
> On my 100mbps LAN using a standard pop/smtp server and win98, I get:
<<quoted lines omitted: 3>>
> So about 1 second to do the send.
> Looks like Exchange is a little slow.
Excuse me, but Exchange is not a little bit slow - Exchange is pig, it's
overkill, it wants fast enough hw and our large corporation is back to Linux
...
-pekr-
[6/10] from: robert:lancaster:opennw at: 5-Jul-2001 16:34
Thanks all.
I'd always thought there was something dodgy about our email...
[7/10] from: philb:upnaway at: 5-Jul-2001 16:12
Hi Robert,
I am not at work now .... but when I use Rebol with out exchange server there it does
take roughly the same time (10-20 seconds). :-(
Anyone know how to revceve mail from a MS exchange server?
Cheers Phil
-- Original Message --
Thanks all.
I'd always thought there was something dodgy about our email...
[8/10] from: petr:krenzelok:trz:cz at: 5-Jul-2001 12:12
----- Original Message -----
From: <[philb--upnaway--com]>
To: <[rebol-list--rebol--com]>
Sent: Thursday, July 05, 2001 10:12 AM
Subject: [REBOL] Re: How fast should 'send b??
> Hi Robert,
>
> I am not at work now .... but when I use Rebol with out exchange server
there it does take roughly the same time (10-20 seconds). :-(
The truth is - there is no reason why it should be so slow. I encountered
significant slowdown, once our admins did some change to the net, and both
rebol and netscape were so slow. Then I found out, that Rebol as well as
Netscape are trying to use proxy server to find it's way to pop account.
The solution was to bypass proxy server:
system/schemes/default/proxy/bypass: ["your.smtp.server.here"]
or maybe separately for smtp:
system/schemes/smtp/proxy/bypass: ["your.smtp.server.here"]
you can also try to trace your network activity by setting:
trace/net: true
.. maybe it will help ...
-pekr-
[9/10] from: robert:lancaster:opennw at: 6-Jul-2001 9:53
I use the IMAP scheme in REBOL. (as work doesn't run a POP server, so I gues
I'm still using MS Echange in some form.) REBOLs IMAP scheme is fairly easy
to use.
However I'm not sure it covers all the proper IMAP commands.. ( ie use Mail
Folder XXX (??), send mail etc...) However I base this assumption on using
REBOLs IMAP about four times and having a tiny glimpse of an "Introduction
to IMAP" book I saw for a split second somewhere last week while running
through a book shop....
Any one know better???
P.S Long live One Based Indexing!!! <HE he he he he ha he ho. Now (laughs
weakly).... back to C >
[10/10] from: holger:rebol at: 5-Jul-2001 15:48
On Fri, Jul 06, 2001 at 09:53:51AM +1200, Robert Lancaster wrote:
> I use the IMAP scheme in REBOL. (as work doesn't run a POP server, so I gues
> I'm still using MS Echange in some form.) REBOLs IMAP scheme is fairly easy
<<quoted lines omitted: 4>>
> to IMAP" book I saw for a split second somewhere last week while running
> through a book shop....
REBOL's IMAP implementation supports the majority of features defined in
RFC 2192 (imap:// URL standard). There were some very slight deviations,
as the result of trying to stay compatible with the existing pop:// scheme.
Among the supported features are searches and mailbox selection. To select
a mailbox use something like
p: open imap://user:[pass--server]/mailbox
Depending on the file organization on the server "mailbox" may have to be specified
as a file path relative to some directory (typically the user's home directory).
For instance in order to access a mail folder on my Unix box I have to use
p: open imap://user:[pass--server]/Mail/mailbox
instead, because all mail folders are located in ~/Mail. Windows-based
IMAP servers may be different.
The FULL IMAP standard goes far beyond what is specified for access through
URLs though. Those additional features are not supported by REBOL or other
environments which access IMAP through URLs. You would lower-level access
for that. Same situation as with ftp:// vs. the full FTP protocol.
AFAIK sending mail is not supported by IMAP at all though. You need SMTP
for that.
--
Holger Kruse
[holger--rebol--com]
Notes
- Quoted lines have been omitted from some messages.
View the message alone to see the lines that have been omitted