Paul J Stevens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> sr - 07-Dec-04 18:39 CET >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Hi Paul and everybody, is the out of range error triggered by the "Mark all >> as read" menu item in Outlook express the same problem as in the original >> bugnote of this thread? Should I create a new thread? > > Please do. I've confirmed the bug. OE is threading the edges of imap > compliance here. > > The dbmail response 'BAD invalid message range' is actually quite valid. > OE specifies a range of 1:someverybigvalue in the STORE command, a value > which is totally out of range and, according to the RFC *should* therefore > trigger a BAD response. > > It says *should*, not *must*, so we can probably accomodate OE on this one. > > However, looking into this I see that OE is doing some weird shit.
So either we're causing some internal bug with OE, which I don't even want to think about, or we should just pretend that OE thinks that huge numbers are equivalent to '*', which I think would make the semantics work out. Must be something like, "640K is like infinity for computers!" ;-) If OE is consistently giving us numbers larger than 64 bits, it should be really easy to say, "anything bigger than 64 bits is *" and work it like that. Aaron
