One element seems wrong but I am not 100% certain. This server (which I cannot identify since it has not been identified to me) claims IMAP4Rev1 compliance by virtue of its initial response (* OK IMAP4rev1 Service Ready).
IMAP4rev1 compliance is indicated by "IMAP4REV1" appearing in the CAPABILITY list.
But when sent a SELECT command that succeeds, it does not return a UIDVALIDITY response.
Unless that server is IMAP2, it is broken.
Now RFC 3501 states that, "If [the UIDVALIDITY response] is missing, the server does not support unique identifiers."
Please read a few paragraphs higher in RFC 3501: Note that earlier versions of this protocol only required the FLAGS, EXISTS, and RECENT untagged data; consequently, client implementations SHOULD implement default behavior for missing data as discussed with the individual item.
In other words, if UIDVALIDITY is missing, the server is an IMAP2 server.
-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum.
