MBOX-Line: From arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no  Sat Feb 16 12:39:55 2008
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:41 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] header.fields fetching
In-Reply-To: <oeGcRgEh/G5xGlxJ8jHQ3g.md5@libertango.oryx.com>
References: <1203188859.4901.147.camel@hurina>
	<rLpAj0qCNeD2mVCkSSk87w.md5@libertango.oryx.com>
	<8782ACCD-1349-445D-BEAA-EB5409610D24@iki.fi>
	<oeGcRgEh/G5xGlxJ8jHQ3g.md5@libertango.oryx.com>
Message-ID: <PRxc2fMkEbRnGslXauDkeQ.md5@libertango.oryx.com>

All that said, treating a header field differently in HEADER.FIELDS and 
HEADER.FIELDS.NOT sounds dubious to me. Not necessaribly wrong by the 
RFCs, but I can't imagine why it would be desirable.

Arnt

