MBOX-Line: From mrc+imap at panda.com  Wed Jun 23 10:01:21 2010
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Mark Crispin <mrc+imap@panda.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:45 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Handle failures during STORE command execution
In-Reply-To: <30462.1277311205.980277@puncture>
References: <AANLkTimu9HE_yXxlM9Zy6yNhvmgoOW3Xlj3aDQmCBDDL@mail.gmail.com>
	<30462.1277309118.168996@puncture>
	<AANLkTimuPuKtomDd6kyvXLkofyQyShbDxRDUZLaeWwQ6@mail.gmail.com>
	<alpine.OSX.2.00.1006230919010.266@hsinghsing.panda.com>
	<30462.1277311205.980277@puncture>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.2.00.1006230957230.266@hsinghsing.panda.com>

On Wed, 23 Jun 2010, Dave Cridland wrote:
> That's not quite what you wrote in 3501:
>      A suffix of ".SILENT" in
>    the data item name prevents the untagged FETCH, and the server
>    SHOULD assume that the client has determined the updated value
>    itself or does not care about the updated value.

Note the "does not care".

Due to timing races with simultaneous sessions, it is impossible for the
client using SILENT to determine the updated value with a guarantee of
accuracy.

So, "determined the updated value" should be interpreted as "guessed at an
updated value that is accurate enough for its purposes".

Yes, that's wishy-washy.  I would have preferred simply "does not care".

-- Mark --

http://panda.com/mrc
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep deciding what to eat for lunch.
Liberty is a well-armed sheep contesting the vote.

