On Sun, 16 Sep 2007 13:47:46 -0700 (PDT), Mark Crispin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Note the following text in RFC 3501, section 6.3.9: > > The returned untagged LSUB response MAY contain different mailbox > flags from a LIST untagged response. If this should happen, the > flags in the untagged LIST are considered more authoritative. > > A special situation occurs when using LSUB with the % wildcard. > Consider what happens if "foo/bar" (with a hierarchy delimiter of > "/") is subscribed but "foo" is not. A "%" wildcard to LSUB must > return foo, not foo/bar, in the LSUB response, and it MUST be > flagged with the \Noselect attribute. > >Many people misunderstand what LSUB does. A name returned by LSUB does >not necessarily even exist! The IMAP subscription facility is best >thought of as being equivalent to bookmarks in a web browser. OK, I was poking around with the Tcl client script, trying to learn more about imap and the uw server, and noticed the apparent anomaly. Thanks, Mark, for pointing me to the relevant RFC section. -- Internet service http://www.isp2dial.com/ _______________________________________________ Imap-uw mailing list Imap-uw@u.washington.edu https://mailman1.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-uw
