Email protocals

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Can someone here give me a brief comparison of the IMAP, POP, and SMTP protocals? I cant tell them apart anymore. After reading a ton of web sites, they seem to blur togather...



Also, what potocal does Exchange use for internal corporate messaging?



What is X400?

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 10
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    SMTP (Simple Mail Transfer Protocol) is for outgoing mail. Any mail you send from a POP or IMAP client will be via a SMTP server.



    POP (Post Office Protocol) downloads e-mail to your mail client and stores messages locally.



    IMAP (Internet Message Access Protocol) keeps mail on the server...you read mail off the server. Generally, if you want to read your mail from multiple computers, you should use IMAP because if you want to be able to access all your mail with a POP client, you will have to download ALL your messages onto each computer. With IMAP, you only load headers, and the mail you want to read.
  • Reply 2 of 10
    mjpacimjpaci Posts: 79member
    Exchange uses a proprietary protocol called MAPI (look a lot like IMAP, eh?) to handle mail. It is very similar to IMAP but not compatable. Suprised?



    --Mike
  • Reply 3 of 10
    There is also a secure email protocol. Although I forget what it is called. <img src="graemlins/hmmm.gif" border="0" alt="[Hmmm]" />
  • Reply 4 of 10
    eugeneeugene Posts: 8,254member
    Well, there are SSL supported versions of IMAP and POP3.



    There is also a password handler called APOP which works with POP3.



    A few of my accounts support APOP. Some support IMAP and POP3 via SSL. Some support none of these secure transfer protocols...
  • Reply 5 of 10
    dstranathandstranathan Posts: 1,715member
    Thanks guys





    Mike: MAPI? I was confused lookin' at my Exchange server, thinking it was IMAP! Thats pretty tricky! You are right!



    What I don't understand is if I send an email using SMTP to my mail server via my client, does the server receive via SMTP or POP/IMAP before it routes my message to the destination? I guess I don't undertand if these protocals work 2 ways or if they are 1 way protocals.



    Does that make sense?
  • Reply 6 of 10
    dstranathandstranathan Posts: 1,715member
    What MAPI-enabled apps are available fro OS X? I want to connect to my Exchange server in X, but I think Outlook 2001 sucks in Classic. Is it possible to use Entourage in X with Exchange? I have heard conflicting comments on this topic.



    Do you guyes really think that there will NEVER be a OS X Exchange client? That will KILL the Mac at my company! We are still waiting for Quark in X, but if Outlook never gets developed for X, I will scream "conspiracy"!
  • Reply 7 of 10
    [quote]Originally posted by dstranathan:

    [QB]Do you guyes really think that there will NEVER be a OS X Exchange client? That will KILL the Mac at my company! We are still waiting for Quark in X, but if Outlook never gets developed for X, I will scream "conspiracy"!

    ...QB]<hr></blockquote>



    Uhm... What about OfficevX - Entourage for X??? That should work well.



    PB



    [ 04-26-2002: Message edited by: Powerbook ]</p>
  • Reply 8 of 10
    mjpacimjpaci Posts: 79member
    Powerbook:



    Entourage does NOT connect to Exchange servers in the same manner Outlook 2001 does. You will NOT get all of the "cool" groupware features that Exchange provides.



    --Mike
  • Reply 9 of 10
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    [quote]Originally posted by dstranathan:

    <strong>What MAPI-enabled apps are available fro OS X? I want to connect to my Exchange server in X, but I think Outlook 2001 sucks in Classic. Is it possible to use Entourage in X with Exchange? I have heard conflicting comments on this topic.</strong><hr></blockquote>mjpaci has it right. I use Entourage (before that, mail.app) to read and send e-mail through our exchange server. But you can't do all the stuff, like calendars, that no one I know uses anyway.

    <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" />
  • Reply 10 of 10
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Personally, I remain skeptical of protocals as they maintain some of the waistline ill effect of regular cals. Now, if someone could get me some psuedocals, that would be something.
Sign In or Register to comment.