MBOX-Line: From lyndon at orthanc.ca  Wed May 30 11:58:51 2007
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:39 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Vista Mail doesn't handle \NoSelect mailboxes?
In-Reply-To: <alpine.WNT.0.99.0705301141380.5388@Shimo-Tomobiki.Panda.COM>
References: <alpine.OSX.0.99.0705301048240.11683@pangtzu.panda.com>
	<20070530113546.Q27473@orthanc.ca>
	<alpine.WNT.0.99.0705301141380.5388@Shimo-Tomobiki.Panda.COM>
Message-ID: <20070530115241.B27473@orthanc.ca>

> That begs the question as to what point there is to subscribing the \NoSelect 
> name, and why Vista Mail feels that a server's refusal to subscribe such a 
> name means that it should not allow access to any children of that name!

I don't dispute that Vista's behaviour here is braindead.

> Note that RFC 3501 says:
>      A server MAY validate the mailbox argument to SUBSCRIBE to verify
>      that it exists.  However, it MUST NOT unilaterally remove an
>      existing mailbox name from the subscription list even if a mailbox
>      by that name no longer exists.

Which effectively says the subscription database is decoupled from the 
actual folders.  I always thought that MAY was a bit of a blemish, but 
then again most implementations botch subscribe so badly that it's 
pointless worrying about it.

--lyndon

   Memory is like sex: it's better if it's real.

