MBOX-Line: From janssen at parc.com  Fri Jan 25 21:18:48 2008
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Bill Janssen <janssen@parc.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:41 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] example of authentication PLAIN with imap? 
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSO.4.64.0801252104020.9300@vanye.mho.net> 
References: <08Jan25.155553pst."58696"@synergy1.parc.xerox.com>
	<alpine.WNT.1.00.0801251607230.3096@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washignton.EDU>
	<08Jan25.172524pst."58696"@synergy1.parc.xerox.com>
	<alpine.WNT.1.00.0801251732060.3096@Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washignton.EDU>
	<08Jan25.195809pst."58696"@synergy1.parc.xerox.com>
	<Pine.BSO.4.64.0801252104020.9300@vanye.mho.net>
Message-ID: <08Jan25.211854pst."58696"@synergy1.parc.xerox.com>

> Nope.  You didn't check the syntax for a command continuation request 
> response.  On page 84 of RFC 3501 we find:
> 
> continue-req    = "+" SP (resp-text / base64) CRLF
> 
> I.e., the space after the plus-sign is mandatory, even when the base64 is 
> empty.  So make the first server line above:
>   S: + \r\n

Ah, thanks!

> As a side-note, the server should consider including in the tagged OK 
> response to AUTHENTICATE a CAPABILITY response code that lists the 
> capaibilities that are useful after authentication.  e.g.,
> 
>   S: 4 OK [CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 IDLE MULTIAPPEND X-MOTTO] Authentication succeeded\r\n
> 
> (c.f. section 6.2.2p9 for details and when not bother)

OK, will do.

Bill

