MBOX-Line: From mrc at CAC.Washington.EDU  Wed Oct 24 09:50:19 2007
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:40 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] STATUS on a \NoSelect mailbox
In-Reply-To: <1289589251.146651193229245957.JavaMail.root@dogfood.zimbra.com>
References: <1289589251.146651193229245957.JavaMail.root@dogfood.zimbra.com>
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.0.9999.0710240947490.10639@pangtzu.panda.com>

UW imapd has always returned NO if you attempt a STATUS command on a 
\NoSelect name.  Thus, I consider such behavior acceptable and correct.

The idea of "\NoSelect mailbox" is the problem; that's an oxymoron. 
IMHO, a mailbox, by definition, does not have \NoSelect associated with 
its name.

Following that reasoning, LIST does not return mailboxes, but instead 
returns names; and that the names that do not have \NoSelect are 
mailboxes.

On Wed, 24 Oct 2007, Dan Karp wrote:
> We've always gone on the assumption that you should be able to ask for 
> STATUS on any mailbox returned in a LIST response.  The new Gmail IMAP 
> implementation doesn't seem to play that way -- they have a base 
> \NoSelect mailbox that's returned from LIST but that returns NO on 
> STATUS:
>
>   A3 LIST "" "*"
>   * LIST () "/" "INBOX"
>   * LIST () "/" "Trash"
>   * LIST (\Noselect) "/" "[Gmail]"
>   * LIST () "/" "[Gmail]/All Mail"
>   * LIST () "/" "[Gmail]/Drafts"
>   * LIST () "/" "[Gmail]/Sent Mail"
>   * LIST () "/" "[Gmail]/Spam"
>   * LIST () "/" "[Gmail]/Starred"
>   * LIST () "/" "[Gmail]/Trash"
>   A3 OK Success
>
>   A6 STATUS [Gmail] (UIDVALIDITY)
>   A6 NO Invalid folder: [Gmail] (Failure)
>
> Is this acceptable server behavior?

-- 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.

