Hi
You may consider this to be merely a documentation bug. It was that
until the first implementations were rolled out the door. It's no
longer that.
WinGate doesn't send EXPUNGEs (it explicitly suppresses them for this).
Presumably there are other servers, which is what caused Mozilla to
implement MOVE in Thunderbird (AOL? Fastmail?). So there are millions
of clients deployed.
All I'm saying is there are deployed servers and clients that follow
the current I-D.
Therefore If you change the behaviour without changing the method name
/ advertisement or any discernable behaviour from the client then a
server won't know if a client expects EXPUNGE responses or not, and /
or whether an EXPUNGE response will break it. And there will be
clients out there who expect one or the other behaviour, and older
servers who do it one way, and maybe newer ones that do it the new way.
And the expunge is completely redundant from an information POV. You
do a UID MOVE 1:1000 and you really want to get 1000 expunges back?
What does that really tell you that you couldn't deduce from the final
OK result (no error case)?
We could very easily add the EXPUNGES back in. But that may cause a
nightmare of support. We can't force everyone to upgrade their server.
We can't force everyone to upgrade it in synch with all their email
clients that use it.
Now this all may be moot if we know of no clients that can't handle
either behaviour (e.g. existing deployed clients that will break if
they get an EXPUNGE back from a MOVE). If there are no such clients,
is it even broken then? Why do we need the EXPUNGE responses? It
appears to work fine without them.
It should just be a question of whether the EXPUNGE reponses solve some
outstanding problem / hole in the currently deployed method.
Otherwise this might be a good case for a new name, like MOVEX or
something.
Adrien
----
Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.com
WinGate 7 is released! - http://www.wingate.com/getlatest/
------ Original Message ------
From: "Arnt Gulbrandsen" <[email protected]>
To: "Adrien W. de Croy" <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Sent: 1/06/2012 6:03:26 p.m.
Subject: Re: [imap5] Should unsolicited EXPUNGE responses be returned
during UID MOVE?
Listen closely. The missing EXPUNGEs are a document bug, not
representative of any servers I know.
Arnt
_______________________________________________
imap5 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5
