Re: Leave on server woes.
Dear Thomas, On 04:39 20.12.2002, you [Thomas Fernandez ([EMAIL PROTECTED])] wrote... What is the UID for anyway, since the MID is already unique? The MID is only in the headers of the message. The client would have to issue TOP for each message in order to see wheter it already has that message. Server ssupporting UIDL can give you such a list in one row. :) Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Any time things appear to be going better, you have overlooked something. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hello Johannes, On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 10:19:34 +0100 GMT (20/12/02, 16:19 +0700 GMT), Johannes Posel wrote: The MID is only in the headers of the message. The client would have to issue TOP for each message in order to see wheter it already has that message. Server ssupporting UIDL can give you such a list in one row. :) I see. But from an efficiency POV, it is - well, inefficient to create two unique IDs for each message in the internet. Room for improvement in the RFCs, I'd think. ;-) -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. I bought a portable cable tv. Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hi Thomas, On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 19:51:57 +0700 Thomas Fernandez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The MID is only in the headers of the message. The client would have to issue TOP for each message in order to see wheter it already has that message. Server ssupporting UIDL can give you such a list in one row. :) I see. But from an efficiency POV, it is - well, inefficient to create two unique IDs for each message in the internet. Room for improvement in the RFCs, I'd think. ;-) No. But that's far to technically. -- Peter Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Leave on server woes.
Hello Johannes, Monday, December 16, 2002, 6:05:34 AM, you wrote: JP Dear Peter, JP On 11:03 16.12.2002, you [Peter Palmreuther JP ([EMAIL PROTECTED])] wrote... The trouble the OP might be run into will likely be: the POP3-server does not generate the same UID for the same message every time. This is a known, but not wide spread problem which can only be fixed on server side. The Bat! can do _nothing_ about it, it's only chance to JP I know of at least one pop3 server that has this as a *feature*, to JP prevent users from using the server in an IMAP way ;) JP Cheers, JP Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] After many gyrations since I am administrator of one mailserver and they are administrator of another(the culprit). I have found a second POP3 server with this wonderful undocumented feature. Thanks millions for everyone's help.. -- Best regards, Craftsmanmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Monday, December 16, 2002, Peter Palmreuther wrote... The trouble the OP might be run into will likely be: the POP3-server does not generate the same UID for the same message every time. This is a known, but not wide spread problem which can only be fixed on server side. Technically this isn't a 'problem'... well... it is a problem in respect to downloading mail, as you get duplicates, however it isn't a problem in respect to what is defined as the rules for the protocol. ,- [ UIDL ] | While it is generally preferable for server implementations to store | arbitrarily assigned unique-ids in the maildrop, this specification is | intended to permit unique-ids to be calculated as a hash of the | message. Clients should be able to handle a situation where two | identical copies of a message in a maildrop have the same unique-id. `- By definition of the RFCs [1], I don't think UIDL is even a required command based on the minimum list of commands, and additional commands they provide. [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1939.txt - -- Jonathan Angliss ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- iQA/AwUBPgJLYSuD6BT4/R9zEQIu5QCglHEUR/+2+rMR5JUt+AIh7cCMqMMAniN8 GBfD2Ocl8n+bHNE2bkdsec+k =XL/g -END PGP SIGNATURE- Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re[2]: Leave on server woes.
Hello Jonathan, Thursday, December 19, 2002, 5:42:36 PM, you wrote: JA -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- JA Hash: SHA1 JA On Monday, December 16, 2002, Peter Palmreuther wrote... The trouble the OP might be run into will likely be: the POP3-server does not generate the same UID for the same message every time. This is a known, but not wide spread problem which can only be fixed on server side. JA Technically this isn't a 'problem'... well... it is a problem in JA respect to downloading mail, as you get duplicates, however it isn't a JA problem in respect to what is defined as the rules for the protocol. JA ,- [ UIDL ] JA | While it is generally preferable for server implementations to store JA | arbitrarily assigned unique-ids in the maildrop, this specification is JA | intended to permit unique-ids to be calculated as a hash of the JA | message. Clients should be able to handle a situation where two JA | identical copies of a message in a maildrop have the same unique-id. JA `- JA By definition of the RFCs [1], I don't think UIDL is even a required JA command based on the minimum list of commands, and additional JA commands they provide. JA [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc1939.txt JA - -- JA Jonathan Angliss JA ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) JA -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- JA iQA/AwUBPgJLYSuD6BT4/R9zEQIu5QCglHEUR/+2+rMR5JUt+AIh7cCMqMMAniN8 JA GBfD2Ocl8n+bHNE2bkdsec+k JA =XL/g JA -END PGP SIGNATURE- JA JA Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: JA http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html Clearly, though, they state that it is preferable this be handled via server, though a client should be able to handle identical copies with the same unique-id [oxymoron there, huh?]. While these are, truly, listed as optional, this makes for some pretty strange science in any situation where mail is left on the server. I know *I'm* tired of hitting the Kill Dupes button! ;-) -- Best regards, Craftsmanmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Dear Craftsman, On 00:53 20.12.2002, you [Craftsman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])] wrote... server, though a client should be able to handle identical copies with the same unique-id [oxymoron there, huh?]. There's always the message ID left, which will be a same unique ID if you're accesing the same mailspool... Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Any time things appear to be going better, you have overlooked something. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hello Johannes, On Fri, 20 Dec 2002 01:25:25 +0100 GMT (20/12/02, 07:25 +0700 GMT), Johannes Posel wrote: server, though a client should be able to handle identical copies with the same unique-id [oxymoron there, huh?]. There's always the message ID left, which will be a same unique ID if you're accesing the same mailspool... What is the UID for anyway, since the MID is already unique? -- Cheers, Thomas. Moderator der deutschen The Bat! Beginner Liste. Don't forget your wife's name . . . that will mess up the love. (Roger, 8) Message reply created with The Bat! 1.62 Christmas Edition under Chinese Windows 98 4.10 Build A using an AMD Athlon K7 1.2GHz, 128MB RAM Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hi Allie, On Sun, 15 Dec 2002 16:29:21 -0500 Allie C Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I set The Bat to leave files on the server, it will continue to download *all* the files left on the server over and over. It doesn't take long to end up with a gazillion dupes. That's likely a server configuration problem. ACK. The server is supposed to mark successfully retrieved messages as 'read'. He might do so, but this is irrelevant for TB! working the expected way. When TB! reconnects, it will then know which messages are new and not yet retrieved from which have already been retrieved. Not by any 'server mark'. The Bat! fetches a list of 'UID's (via UIDL command) at the beginning of a session. It stores the UID of every message it retrieved locally and the next time it fetches these list it compares it to it's local copy. Every UID alredy present in it's data set it ignores, every unknown UID is queued for the corresponding message to be downloaded. After successfully downlowding the mail the new UID is added to the local repository. The trouble the OP might be run into will likely be: the POP3-server does not generate the same UID for the same message every time. This is a known, but not wide spread problem which can only be fixed on server side. The Bat! can do _nothing_ about it, it's only chance to identify a message on server definitely is: the UID. Every other possibility to identify a duplicate is connected to downloading the message and do a local 'Dup check' as 'Kill duplicates' does. Hope this clears thing a little bit, albeit it is no solution to the OPs problem. I doubt there's any solution, but the administrator fixing the server :-/ -- Pit Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Dear Peter, On 11:03 16.12.2002, you [Peter Palmreuther ([EMAIL PROTECTED])] wrote... The trouble the OP might be run into will likely be: the POP3-server does not generate the same UID for the same message every time. This is a known, but not wide spread problem which can only be fixed on server side. The Bat! can do _nothing_ about it, it's only chance to I know of at least one pop3 server that has this as a *feature*, to prevent users from using the server in an IMAP way ;) Cheers, Johannesmailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] -- If you only have a hammer, you tend to see every problem as a nail. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hi Johannes, On Mon, 16 Dec 2002 12:05:34 +0100 Johannes Posel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The trouble the OP might be run into will likely be: the POP3-server does not generate the same UID for the same message every time. This is a known, but not wide spread problem which can only be fixed on server side. The Bat! can do _nothing_ about it, it's only chance to I know of at least one pop3 server that has this as a *feature*, to prevent users from using the server in an IMAP way ;) Seems to be a great piece of software. Could you post the name, so I do know what to avoid to install accidentally? :-))) Not I'd like to switch away from my preferred software setup on a new server, but it could be interesting to know which paket gets a pinning of -1 :-) P.S.: As this is OT^2 a PM reply is appreciated :-) -- Pit Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Leave on server woes.
If I set The Bat to leave files on the server, it will continue to download *all* the files left on the server over and over. It doesn't take long to end up with a gazillion dupes. Anybody know a cure? Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hey Craftsman, My MUA believes 'The Bat! (v1.61)' was used to write [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED] on Sunday, December 15, 2002 at 2:53:04 PM. C If I set The Bat to leave files on the server, it will continue to C download *all* the files left on the server over and over. It C doesn't take long to end up with a gazillion dupes. C Anybody know a cure? Well, you can kill all the dupes with Folder \ Kill Dupes I don't recall seeing the multiple DL problem though. -- Tim Musson Flying with The Bat! eMail v1.61 Windows 2000 5.0.2195 (Service Pack 2) A television may insult your intelligence but nothing rubs it in like a computer. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hello Craftsman, On Sunday, December 15, 2002, 14:53:04 -0500 GMT (which was 20:53 local time), Craftsman wrote: C If I set The Bat to leave files on the server, it will continue to C download *all* the files left on the server over and over. It doesn't C take long to end up with a gazillion dupes. C Anybody know a cure? I have set the Bat! to leave messages on server for two days just in case. I never experienced your problem.. -- Cheers, Andre Love is the feeling that you feel when you feel the feeling that you never felt before. Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hello Andre Wichartz, on 2002-12-15 at 21:31 CET you wrote: AW Hello Craftsman, AW On Sunday, December 15, 2002, 14:53:04 -0500 GMT (which was 20:53 AW local time), Craftsman wrote: C If I set The Bat to leave files on the server, it will continue to C download *all* the files left on the server over and over. It doesn't C take long to end up with a gazillion dupes. C Anybody know a cure? AW I have set the Bat! to leave messages on server for two days just in AW case. I never experienced your problem.. Neither do I. I'm using 3 different POP3 mail servers, all are configured to leave the messages on the server for now. Everything behaves well, no duplicates and yes, the messages are still on the server Uwe. -- TheBat! 1.62 Christmas Edition on Windows 2000 Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED]">mid:[EMAIL PROTECTED],
Craftsman [C] wrote:'
C If I set The Bat to leave files on the server, it will continue
C to download *all* the files left on the server over and over. It
C doesn't take long to end up with a gazillion dupes.
That's likely a server configuration problem. The server is supposed
to mark successfully retrieved messages as 'read'. When TB!
reconnects, it will then know which messages are new and not yet
retrieved from which have already been retrieved.
--
-=] Allie C Martin [=- {List Moderator}
MUA: TB! v1.62 Christmas Edition ___ OS: WinXP Pro (SP1)
Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information:
http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
Re: Leave on server woes.
Hello Craftsman, C If I set The Bat to leave files on the server, it will C continue to download *all* the files left on the server C over and over. It doesn't take long to end up with a C gazillion dupes. I had the same problem, but only when I switched to 1.62; I now leave all messages on the server for 1 day - since then all is well. Regards, Maurice C C Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: C http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html Current version is 1.62 | Using TBUDL information: http://www.silverstones.com/thebat/TBUDLInfo.html
