MBOX-Line: From arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no  Fri Jun 30 10:34:18 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] IMAP disconnection
In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSX.4.64.0606301005320.408@pangtzu.panda.com>
References: <etPan.44a548f0.6bad5e90.d87@utopia>
	<Pine.OSX.4.64.0606300923160.408@pangtzu.panda.com>
	<kFysL5r4CM2misKgHbA2Fw.md5@libertango.oryx.com>
	<Pine.OSX.4.64.0606301005320.408@pangtzu.panda.com>
Message-ID: <Re4Nroh7Op3/YhWIBzHVWA.md5@libertango.oryx.com>

Mark Crispin writes:
> On Fri, 30 Jun 2006, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
>> Don't you think the servers on such platforms should deal with it, 
>> instead of expecting all clients on all platforms to do so?
>> For example, a server on such a platform can fork off another intance 
>> of itself (invisible to the client), close the IMAP connection, and 
>> let the client go on its way?
>
> That makes no sense.  I said that the server gets a non-maskable kill 
> from the OS.  The server has no notice, nor any opportunity to react; 
> it is instantly destroyed.

It has the opportunity to fork when it receives LOGOUT. The fork would 
be finished before the connection close arrives.

Arnt

