MBOX-Line: From arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no  Fri Sep  1 02:49:29 2006
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:37 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] changed capabilities after login
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSO.4.64.0609010022420.28193@vanye.mho.net>
References: <20060901002118.GB16606@ventoux.cs.ubc.ca>
	<Pine.WNT.4.65.0608311723400.2392@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU>
	<Pine.BSO.4.64.0609010022420.28193@vanye.mho.net>
Message-ID: <z42pDWm/+FwBqOWN82HSXw.md5@libertango.oryx.com>

IMO, the Mirapoint server is at fault. What it does is legal according 
to the RFC, I suppose, but it's not a great win wrt. interoperability.

If the Mirapoint proxy advertises any capabilities that the proxied 
server does not support, the Mirapoint proxy should deal with that. 
Hiding being a part of the RFC that most people miss isn't acceptable. 
One thing it could do is issue CAPABILITY on its own and report the 
changed capability list in the response to LOGIN, or in any random 
untagged OK.

(Many years ago, when I worked at a company that no longer exists, I 
wrote an IMAP proxy. It had a bug much like this. Legal according to 
the RF, broke clients. The only difference is that my bug had a good 
reason and was useful.)

Arnt

