(and server administrator) complaints caused by a
violator.]
Ten Commandments of How to Write an IMAP client
Mark Crispin
1. Thou shalt not assume that it is alright to open multiple IMAP
sessions selected on the same mailbox simultaneously, lest thou face
On Mon, 28 Jan 2003, Timo Sirainen wrote:
Multiple
connections eat more memory and more network resources.
How did you arrive at this conclusion? I suggest that you have fallen
prey to an urban myth. Like most myths, there is a vestige of historical
truth; in the NCP protocol used prior to
On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, Terry Gray wrote:
And then came SSL/TLS...
Right! Which is all the more reason not to continuously make new
connections, and instead to keep the connections that you have. The cost
paid by SSL/TLS in session startup swamps the modest cost of having an
ongoing active TCB.
On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, David Harris wrote:
To me, this reads that any parenthesized list of zero or more flags is a
legitimate parameter to the command.
Your reading is correct, and that command is perfectly valid.
I don't have access to a running Cyrus server, but I found that error
message in
On Wed, 22 Jan 2003, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
It seems to me that the problem here is the requirement to keep the
UIDVALIDITY the same when doing RENAME.
Where is that required? What's required is that the last-assigned UID has
to be saved, unless the UIDVALIDITY changes.
I propose the following
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2003, Mark Crispin wrote:
In my humble opinion:
RENAME was a bad idea, and should be removed from the protocol.
What is your advise to an author of an IMAP server that tries hard to
be as compliant as possible? ;)
Lobby
On Tue, 21 Jan 2003, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
I believe that the reference argument to LIST can't be fixed. Will you
join me in lobbying to remove it?
Nonsense. The reference argument to LIST works, and works very well.
The cost of re-opening that can of worms will be mandatory CWD and PWD
In my humble opinion:
RENAME was a bad idea, and should be removed from the protocol.
-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
(Please note: the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list is for discussions
about the design and specification of the IMAP protocol, as opposed to
questions about specific software implementations. Unless there is an
email list or newsgroup dedicated to the IMAP software you are using, I
would
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003, Jan Theofel wrote:
The problem is, that we are not able to create subfolders. The error
message using Outlook 2000 or Squirrelmail 2.10 is, create failed,
mailbox node /home/username/folder/ exists.
The strange thing is that when we try to create a subfolder named
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Timo Sirainen wrote:
Well, UW imapd isn't the only one supporting mboxes anymore. I'm writing
a server that supports multiple mailbox formats, using index files to
make accessing them quite fast.
Ah, but do you support mbox format in a *legacy* environment, meaning that
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003, Jeff wrote:
I use the PHP imap_open command (which includes the UW c-client library)
to open pop mailboxes and it's worked great up till now. However, we've
been unsuccessful in authenticating with 2 different mail servers
running iMail from ipswitch.com.
The mail.fea.net
On Wed, 15 Jan 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* LOGIN [EMAIL PROTECTED] PASSWORD
Unless this IMAP server has been modified to support that @ELAGE.COM
thing, that's your problem. There's probably no such UNIX user as
[EMAIL PROTECTED].
And if the IMAP server has been modified, then the problem
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Timo Sirainen wrote:
How exactly should SEARCH CC, BCC, FROM and TO match the strings? Spec says
contains the specified string in the envelope structure's CC field, but
envelope has it split into multiple fields.
UW IMAP seems to match it directly with the non-parsed
On Mon, 13 Jan 2003, Timo Sirainen wrote:
Oh, sorry. I just checked that search to [EMAIL PROTECTED] didn't match for
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]. It does seem to match for To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (name)
though.
search to [EMAIL PROTECTED] would match To: name [EMAIL PROTECTED] as well.
It didn't
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003 13:39:16 -0500, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
[proposed improved algorithm]
This should probably be done as a
separate THREAD=XXX option.
To make things unambiguous:
I strongly support this. My opposition is solely to the idea of breaking the
existing THREAD=REFERENCES algorithm.
On Sat, 11 Jan 2003, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
I'm not interested in breaking THREAD=REFERENCES. I'm merely saying that if
the current THREAD=REFERENCES is broken, we shouldn't publish it as a
standards-track RFC.
I claim that the current THREAD=REFERENCES is not broken, and should be
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
If this is what people want (and I think I've heard it enough that it is)
I disagree with this claim.
Is there anyone who wants to speak up in favor of using Subject in
threading?
Yes, everybody for whom threading will break if this is removed.
On Fri, 10 Jan 2003, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
Are you saying that there are mailboxes that will not be correctly threaded
in this case?
Or do you not want to get rid of THREAD=REFERENCES because of widespread
deployment?
Yes to both of the above.
-- Mark --
On Thu, 9 Jan 2003 23:12:18 +0100 (CET), Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
qmail saves messages using bare LFs. Should an IMAP server convert the
mime data to CRLF?
Yes.
Should a client assume CRLF / bare LF mime content when fetching data
from the server?
CRLF.
The only actions that can take place before the initial banner that may
consume time are:
1) DNS lookup of the local host name.
2) ident lookup by [x]inetd
I suspect an ident lookup. Check your TCP wrappers configuration.
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, nick elprin wrote:
Does anyone know how well abstracted the storage mechanism in the UW
code is?
All access to a mail store (whether it be a network protocol, a local
filesystem object, or a database) in UW imapd is done via a driver, which
is a set of routines that
This note is to announce the availability of the University of Washington
IMAP toolkit version 2002a. This release does not introduce major new
functionality. Instead, it addresses bugs found in earlier versions.
Source code for the latest IMAP toolkit release is available at:
On Sun, 8 Dec 2002, Jorge Minassian wrote:
* BYE Service not available localhost.localdomain IMAP4rev1 2001.315rh at
Sun, 8 Dec 2002 15:25:40 +0300 (GMT-3)
You have an /etc/nologin file, which indicates that new logins should not
be permitted.
-- Mark --
http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
On Thu, 5 Dec 2002, Tomki wrote:
On the ftp site, I see that the archive imap-2002 is no longer in place,
but the development archive is.
Does this indicate such a problem with imap-2002 that the dev version
should be used instead?
Yes. A problem has been discovered such that the recommended
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002 17:50:22 +0100 (CET), Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
* STATUS new (messages 3 uidnext 0 uidvalidity 0)
So even if it isn't too clear _why_ a client would want to do this, it's
obviously a case that is not handled in the rfc in any way.
Huh? The RFC is very specific about the
On Tue, 3 Dec 2002, Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
If someone does a STATUS on a mailbox that the IMAP server has not seen
before - what is expected output for UIDNEXT and UIDVALIDITY?
I don't understand this question.
The UIDVALIDITY is always the uidvalidity value assigned to the mailbox,
and
I recently received a request to allow plaintext passwords in unencrypted
connections if the connection is localhost, even if plaintext passwords are
otherwise forbidden in unencrypted connections.
I see no reason not to do this in UW imapd (and make a user very happy), but
before I do it I'd
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 10:26:12 -0600, Don Moore wrote:
In my opinion, it's not a software author's job to tell users what level
of security they _must_ comply with. If the author wishes to suggest
security, cleartext logins could be disabled by default if the connection is
unsecure. However,
On Wed, 27 Nov 2002 13:14:54 -0500, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
Note: a server implementation MUST implement a
configuration
Although that weasel-wording helps previous source distributions (if you
remember, I lobbied hard for it), it does not help binary distributions if
On Fri, 22 Nov 2002, Newsgroup posting address wrote:
root@jwilde-solaris# /usr/local/sbin/ipop3d
+OK POP3 jwilde-solaris.glocalnet.com v2001.80 server ready
USER james
-ERR Unknown AUTHORIZATION state command
This happens when the software is built to disable plaintext password
On Wed, 20 Nov 2002, Jay Klesitz wrote:
Hi, I am running the imapd linux binary.
- Is there any specific startup parameters? or config files it must read?
- It isn't listening on any ports, thus I am unable to connect to it.
Did you read the installation instructions for imapd? imapd does not
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002 10:38:39 +1300, David Harris wrote:
What is the proper action to take when a client issues a SUBSCRIBE
command with a parameter that already appears in the subscription list?
Should a duplicate be created, or should the existing entry be removed
from the subscription list?
David -
I think that the Mercury server, which allows duplicate subscriptions, is fine
as-is, and does not need to be changed.
If you choose to change your server's behavior, I recommend that it issue a
NO in response to an attempt to subscribe a mailbox that is already
subscribed.
The problem
On Thu, 7 Nov 2002 05:45:49 -0800 , SIDWALL,GRANT (HP-Canada,ex1) wrote:
The customer states that they are using IMAP4.4, and c-client 4.7c2.
This sounds like VERY OLD versions of UW imapd, with known security issues.
It should be upgraded immediately, and that old version not installed on any
On Tue, 5 Nov 2002 11:43:01 +0100 (CET), =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Peter_L=F6fkvist?=
wrote:
Question: Does, the on the home page linked, imap-2002.RC10 support ipv6?
I saw that Peter Derr made a patch to 2002.RC1, but I didn't see any signs
of IPv6 in the 2002.RC10. If not, is there a patch one could get
All IMAP tokens (as opposed to strings such as user name, password, mailbox
name, etc.) are case-insensitive.
On Tue, 5 Nov 2002 07:45:45 -0800 (PST), Mark Crispin wrote:
All IMAP tokens (as opposed to strings such as user name, password, mailbox
name, etc.) are case-insensitive.
However, with that in mind, I don't think that a server should change the case
of tags.
c-client (used by Pine) avoids
That / is a typo.
I will try to get it fixed before the RFC comes out.
Hello Vladimir -
Once again, I would like to thank you for your thoughful analysis and
comments.
I've read your message, and I don't think that there is anything that
justifies recalling the document from the IESG; so it will not go into the new
RFC. However, I certainly will keep your message,
It is an error to set up a black-box-directory without a directory for each
user under it. The software will NOT run under such circumstances. In
versions prior to imap-2002, it will segfault due to a null pointer. In imap-
2002, it will issue an error message and crash.
There is an
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Don Buchholz wrote:
$ gcc -lc-client -o simap simap.c
What happens if you give the command
gcc -o simap simap.c /usr/lib/libc-client.a
If that works, then you need to take your question to the gcc people to
find out the correct way to do linking.
By the way,
Return-Path: is written by your mail delivery agent when it writes to your
mail file. Some broken MDAs don't do this.
If you do not send a LOGOUT and just close the connection:
Depending upon how the operating system fields the event to the server, the
server will see it as a Hangup (SIGINT), Terminated (SIGTERM), or as End
of file on stdin. In my experience, the last is the most common.
If the server logs
On Wed, 9 Oct 2002 11:03:28 -0400, Murat Bicer wrote:
I want the server not to time out, once imap connection is established
between the client and the server.
Your client must send a command at least every 29 minutes. There is a NOOP
command which is suitable for this purpose.
On Wed, 09 Oct 2002 11:42:52 -0400, Pete Maclean wrote:
Mark, thank you for setting us straight on this. For me, another question
arises: when a server detects a connection break, should it process any
IMAP commands that it has pending for the session, or should it discard
them? Seems to
On Thu, 03 Oct 2002 11:46:53 -0700 (PDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
FWIW, I raised the point that a revised draft will be received with the
IESG today and said that I wasn't planning an additional last call unless
there are substantive changes. Everyone seemed happy with that.
Thank you. Do I
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wonder if anyone could tell me if there's an easy way to change the log file
location for imapd (preferably without recompiling!)?
Since there is no reserved syslog facility for imapd, it uses the mail
facility. There are 8 local facilities which
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Vladimir A. Butenko wrote:
Since a mailbox can be opened by several sessions at the same time, this
should be changed to:
; that is, subsequent and concurrent sessions will see any
change in permanent flags.
I make it be concurrent and subsequent, but otherwise
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Vladimir A. Butenko wrote:
, when acceptable authentication credentials have been
provided, after the CLOSE command, or after an error in selecting
a mailbox.
Thank you. I have adopted this suggestion.
-- note about the protocol (IMAP 5 suggestion?)---
some
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Chris Newman wrote:
Does this imply that concurrent sessions see flag change notifications in
response to the next command they issue (as Outlook assumes)? Or are lazy
notifications permissible (where concurrent sessions may get delayed
notification of flag changes)?
I
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Vladimir A. Butenko wrote:
In serveral places the following phrase is being used:
\Recent can not be used as an argument in a
STORE command, and thus can not be changed at all
I only found one place?
Actually, flags can be used as an argument of the APPEND command,
Thank you for your comments. Even if I don't always agree, they are very
valuable since they indicate issues which need to be addressed.
For most of your issues regarding sequences, watch for draft 19. The text has
been completely rewritten, and should be a lot better. I should be posting it
On Thu, 26 Sep 2002 10:09:29 -0700, Vladimir A. Butenko wrote:
Do you suggest that there should be NO strict and explicit definition for
the cases when BAD should be returned instead of NO?
My opinion (subject to change with a convincing argument):
It is desirable to distinguish between BAD
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 10:43:41 +0200, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
Hm. Is the server even allowed to give different responses to two FETCH
commands for the same item?
C: a FETCH 1 RFC822.SIZE
S: * 1 FETCH (RFC822.SIZE 12345)
S: a OK
C: b IDLE
S: +
S: DONE
I'm afraid that we are reaching (or have already reached) the point where we
will have to do another Last Call.
If that is the case, would there be any objection to folding the MULTIAPPEND
draft into the base specification? Unlike other extensions, MULTIAPPEND is
not a new command; it is an
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 10:20:56 -0700, Larry Osterman wrote:
Nit: Should it be should or SHOULD in The server should respond
with a tagged BAD below?
In general, I've avoided placing requirements on server handling of errors.
In my opinion, a compliant server could treat FETCH * of an empty
On 25 Sep 2002 20:36:43 +0100, Jinn Koriech wrote:
From what I understand this should pipe all mail to jinn to
/var/spool/mail/jinn - but instead in the logs dmail reports that it
can't run as root or daemon.
This means either that dmail was invoked incorrectly by procmail, or that the
dmail
There is no simple answer.
If you EXAMINE the mailbox, leave it open, and there is a shared lock, it is
possible that the owner of the mailbox may discover the monitoring if an
EXPUNGE returns a can't do it because someone else has a shared lock error.
On the other hand, EXAMINE may also fail
On Wed, 25 Sep 2002 14:58:39 -0700 (PDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I discovered that the MULTIAPPEND draft had expired while waiting for IESG
action. I've resubmitted it.
Grr. This is not supposed to happen. Documents which are in the system,
and this one most certainly is, are not
On Wed, 11 Sep 2002, Dilip Menon wrote:
Is there a RFC which clearly states the behaviour for multiple mailboxes
during a SEARCH command with RECENT messages arriving?
Do you mean, multiple mailboxes or multiple sessions open on the same
mailbox? I think that you mean the latter.
The
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Max Okumoto wrote:
I am in the process of migrating users away from plain text passwds
over un-encyprted channels. Is there a way to syslog the names of
users that used plain text passwds for imapd and ipop3d?
You'll need to modify the software. The exact modifications
On Mon, 9 Sep 2002, Max Okumoto wrote:
Our current goal is to migrate everyone to imapd/ipop3d over ssl. We
are going to let them use plaintext passwds inside of the ssl tunnel.
SSL tunnel? You're not going to use imapd's native SSL support (which
also includes TLS support)?
If you use
On Fri, 06 Sep 2002 13:11:56 -0600, Nick Couchman wrote:
I'm trying to get imaps to work. Whenever I try to connect (for
instance, telnetting to the imaps port) the server just hangs.
You can not telnet to an imaps port. Telnet is plaintext, and SSL IMAP is
not.
Try using OpenSSL's s_client
On Fri, 06 Sep 2002 15:52:50 -0600, Nick Couchman wrote:
When I try to use the Netscape client, though, it does the same thing. It
will just sit and say it's contacting the server and never actually check
mail or anything.
One problem at a time!
Your test was not any good; telnet to an
On Wed, 21 Aug 2002, Dilip Menon wrote:
So how should the sequence number be? Should it be the same value for a
series of EXPUNGEs or should it be different sequence numbers.
The sequence number is the number that is expunged. Note that the effect
of the expunge is immediate, and all
This message is to announce the release of release candidate 1 of the
University of Washington's IMAP toolkit, version 2002 (imap-2002), on
ftp://ftp.cac.washington.edu/mail/imap-2002.RC1.tar.Z
The imap.tar.Z link now points to this version, and imap-2001a has been
moved to the old/
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
If I understood the question correctly: why would the server bother
returning this? Can the server don't send FETCH reply in this case.
It could avoid sending a FETCH reply, but then it would have to send a NO
instead of an OK. It is a protocol
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
Is it common that IMAP servers also make INBOX available under a different
name?
Ideally, it should not happen. However, implementation issues with legacy
mail stores may make it impossible to prevent.
Is there a way to find out whether two
On Tue, 9 Jul 2002, David Harris wrote:
assume we
have a message with 384 bytes, and the client issues this command:
A30 FETCH 42 (BODY[TEXT]385.16384)crlf
Am I correct in assuming that the correct return for this command is:
* 42 FETCH (BODY[TEXT]385 {0})crlf
Close, but not quite.
From the FAQ:
7.31 What does the UNIX error message: TLS/SSL failure: myserver:
self-signed certificate mean?
7.32 What does the PC error message: TLS/SSL failure: myserver:
Self-signed certificate or untrusted authority mean?
An SSL or TLS session encryption failed
On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 10:03:38 -0700, Mike Oliver wrote:
When I see the last
four of a chunk equal to crlf + crlf or -- + crlf, I assume the message
is ended and parse the message into an object and store it and I send a
tag SP OK APPEND Completed
otherwise I send another + Ready and another
On Mon, 01 Jul 2002 12:05:44 -0700, Mike Oliver wrote:
In Kevin Johnson's book Internet Email Protocols, A developer's Guide,
chapter 6 paragraph 6.3.3
Kevin Johnson's book is to be used to help you understand the specification.
It is not the specification. The specification is RFC 2060.
The
Did you read the UW IMAP toolkit FAQ?
Each of those warnings are discussed there. They are all harmless.
Please note: the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list is for discussions
about the design and specification of the IMAP protocol, as opposed to
questions about specific software implementations.
On Mon, 24 Jun 2002, Jesse W. Asher wrote:
I'd like to change the welcome/greeting message that is displayed by
imapd and pop3d. Right now, it's displaying all kinds of information
that I don't want outsiders to know.
What information, other than the program's version number and the DNS name
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002 16:07:13 +0300, Lefteris Chatzibarbas wrote:
What would be the recommended format of the SEARCH command that
would be generated from the user's filter in order for it to scale
and be able to handle 50,100 or 500 searching criteria?
In a worst-case situation, you can always
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002 02:51:49 -0600, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
I came across similar bug in Netscape 4.79: it can't cope with UIDs bigger
than 2**32-1, Netscape just doesn't display them!
Do you mean 2**31-1?
No IMAP implementation is required to cope with UIDs bigger than 2**32-1.
Also if my
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Lefteris Chatzibarbas wrote:
Is there a limit on how many searching criteria may be specified
on an IMAP4rev1 SEARCH command?
The limit is not on how many criteria, but rather on the depth of the
criteria.
Each OR effectively takes you down a level of nesting. That is:
On Thu, 13 Jun 2002, Lefteris Chatzibarbas wrote:
UW imapd declines to accept nesting more than 50 deep. Instead of nesting
50 deep, you could OR two groups that nest 25 deep and get the same
effect.
By that you mean to send 2 SEARCH commands with less that 50 deep nesting
each? Is that
Thank you Pete. I used to post examples of poor behavior by clients, but
gave up after getting repeatedly flamed for holding clients in contempt
and not understanding client issues.
There is an even better replacement to the
00015 UID SEARCH UID
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Simon Josefsson wrote:
In other words, it should do:
00015 UID SEARCH 1:60 BODY target
00016 UID SEARCH 61:120 BODY target
etc. until it reaches the number of messages in the mailbox:
00020 UID SEARCH 300:343 BODY target
This isn't a complete example -- the
On Tue, 11 Jun 2002, Simon Josefsson wrote:
I need to find all valid UIDs on the server in order to synch the
local header cache against the server.
OK, this is the correct reason.
Now, take it a step further. If, instead of getting a list of valid UIDs
via UID SEARCH ALL, you get the
On Mon, 10 Jun 2002 10:38:23 +0200, Grzegorz Soza wrote:
I get a message in Netscape The current command did
not succeed. The mail server responded: APPEND failed: Execution process
terminated abnormally (9f)..
Try the imap-2002 development snapshot and see if that makes the problem go
away:
On Wed, 05 Jun 2002 03:37:24 -0600, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
If you are foolish^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpublic-spirited enough to be willing to
take it on, I can send you copies of both Rob's document and Bill Yeager's
commentary on it. :-)
I am willing to take this one.
That's great! Attached are
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 10:52:12 +0200, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
2595 looks worse. Making STARTTLS m-t-i means that the IMAP parts of 2595
aren't informational any more. Perhaps 2595 needs to be reissued?
I admit that I'm not current on the politics, but from all appearances 2595 is
Standards Track.
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All I'm saying is that distasteful as it may be to cater to ignorance and
stupidity, it may make sense to do so on occasion.
I agree completely, and would very gratefully appreciate any assistance
(including but not limited to suggested rewrites)
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Sang Park wrote:
I'm trying to get the listing of sub-folders of a specific folder and am so
far unable to do this with the LIST command.
Unfortunately, you've run up against a quality-of-implementation issue
with the Netscape 4.15 server. The server apparently ignores the
On Tue, 4 Jun 2002, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
[IMAP-DISC] Austein, R., Synchronization Operations for Disconnected
IMAP4 Clients, Work in Progress.
I don't recognize this document. It either became an RFC or expired a long time
ago.
Yes, it did expire a long time ago. I am hoping that
Ken -
Good catch! I've fixed it. Thanks.
-- Mark --
On Mon, 3 Jun 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
The normative part of the references:
[IMAP-IMPLEMENTATION] Leiba, B. IMAP Implementation
Recommendations, RFC 2683, September 1999.
[IMAP-MULTIACCESS] Gahrns, M. IMAP4 Multi-Accessed Mailbox
Practice, RFC 2180, July 1997.
both of
As many people have already said, a UID sequence of max+1:* is equivalent to
*, the maximum UID. The presumption here is that max==* but the client does
not know that, which is something that can happen with a UID client.
In the case of a message sequence number, max+1:* is a syntax error.
On Fri, 31 May 2002 22:09:11 +0200 (CEST), Andreas Aardal Hanssen wrote:
*sigh*, and it's not just Sam, it's the whole community. What is a good
implementation, is Cyrus better?
Among freeware servers:
Cyrus is an excellent implementation. There are a couple of minor issues in
Cyrus (as I
On Wed, 29 May 2002 12:35:17 -0700 (PDT), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A specific protocol is another matter. The IESG's belief is that specific
protocols need to have one or more mandatory to implement SASL mechanisms.
Mandatory to implement doesn't mean mandatory to use. Just because you have
On Wed, 29 May 2002, Lawrence Greenfield wrote:
Our local site policy doesn't offer DIGEST-MD5---but
that isn't what we're talking about.
The point seems to be interoperability between compliant implementations.
A client which only implements DIGEST-MD5 is not able to talk to your
server.
I
On Mon, 13 May 2002 12:11:34 +0900 (JST), Mark Keasling wrote:
In a ridiculous extrapolation of your assertion that a client should not
change the data to mirror its GUI, I could assert that an IMAP server should
only have a single mailbox and that other user mailboxes are just part of
the
On Thu, 2 May 2002, Charles E. Robinson III wrote:
May 2 15:17:12 newpes imapd[9686]: [ID 273760 mail.alert] Fatal error
user=frank2 host=fronti [192.168.5.130] mbx=???: Out of memory
May 2 15:17:12 newpes imapd[9686]: [ID 746981 mail.alert] IMAP toolkit
crash: Out of memory
This indicates
On Wed, 01 May 2002 20:28:22 -0400, David Morsberger wrote:
Is there plans to incorporate this feature in UW IMAP 2000a?
Dual-use patches to flat file formats create a break in the name space
between the UNIX filesystem and IMAP mailbox names. This, in turn, breaks the
use of UNIX shell tools
On Thu, 02 May 2002 03:03:23 +0200, Friedrich Lobenstock wrote:
So please be so kind and elaborate a bit why dual-use mailboxes
make life harder for imap complient clients.
The IMAP protocol has a mechanism to determine whether a mailbox is dual-use
or not.
Broken clients do not use this
On Wed, 24 Apr 2002, Ashley Yakeley wrote:
What is the best way for an IMAP client to detect recently arrived mail
in a hierarchy of around a thousand mailbox folders? Should it do a
SELECT on each one periodically? Or should it open up 1000 connections,
SELECT a folder and do IDLE on each
The answer is simple:
The #driver.mbx/ prefix is a recognized only in the CREATE and (in the case
of zero-length files only) APPEND commands.
It is not part of the mailbox name. Nor is it (contrary to what you assert in
your message) part of the UW specification of a mailbox name (which is in
901 - 1000 of 1002 matches
Mail list logo
