IMAP server implementation details unclear in RFC-3501
- From: ondrugs@xxxxxxxxx
- Date: 2 Aug 2006 18:39:24 -0700
I'm hoping someone can clear up these few issues for me...
1. If one were to implement an IMAP server that allowed concurrent
connections to the same mailbox (across multiple servers across NFS),
and one of those connections performed an EXPUNGE command, what would
the (ideal) consequences be for the other connections?
2. Section 5.2 states that a server is "NOT permitted to send an EXISTS
response that would reduce the number of messages in the mailbox". If
another connection expunged messages, then there would certainly be
less.
3. Also, if an expunge occurred, there would be some discrepancy
between the message sequence numbers (in memory) of the currently
selected mailbox and the actual (on disk) mailbox. How would this be
resolved in respect to non-UID based requests?
4. How is the APPENDing of 8-bit data best handled? Should it be
stored as raw 8-bit data, and then converted into base64 when FETCHed,
or base64 encoded on the fly when appending?
Do IMAP clients often APPEND 8-bit data?
Thanks :)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: IMAP server implementation details unclear in RFC-3501
- From: Mark Crispin
- Re: IMAP server implementation details unclear in RFC-3501
- From: Sam
- Re: IMAP server implementation details unclear in RFC-3501
- Prev by Date: Re: Need help with Cyrus installation==> saslpasswd2: no mechanism available
- Next by Date: Re: IMAP server implementation details unclear in RFC-3501
- Previous by thread: Re: Dovecot Compatability Issues With Thunderbird (IMAP)
- Next by thread: Re: IMAP server implementation details unclear in RFC-3501
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
|