MBOX-Line: From arnt at gulbrandsen.priv.no  Tue Oct  5 05:45:39 2010
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:45 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Fwd: iOS IMAP IDLE (Standard "Push Email")
	Deficiency, Explanation?
In-Reply-To: <11166.1286281488.738798@puncture>
References: <87lIcMeyz6O3xDzKeX7qvQ.md5@[192.168.16.40]>
	<11166.1286281488.738798@puncture>
Message-ID: <b6fNJaeHAwuK0JSjsa0fRg.md5@[192.168.16.40]>

Dave Cridland writes:
> Not according to  
> http://developer.apple.com/library/ios/#releasenotes/General/RN-iPhoneSDK-4_0/index.html

No, sorry, my bad. It idles and reacts at once to an unsolited EXISTS, 
but doesn't send IDLE.

> And yes, those ~128 octets include TCP and TLS, so you drop by (if  
> memory serves) about 57 octets. Quite what that buys you in terms of  
> compression is anyone's guess, and I'd imagine quite dependent on  
> usage patterns.

The "new message arrived" formula is either often-repeated and highly 
compressible, or seldom-repeated and unimportant in power terms.

> But in practise, an IDLE session in typical usage seems to last me  
> well over a day on my E71, and it certainly lasts longer than XMPP,  
> but I'm working on the latter.

FWIW, my Galaxy S (Android 2.1) seems to burn battery in polling mode, 
but when I use an IDLE-using client the battery lives long.

Arnt

