MBOX-Line: From snowjn at aol.com  Thu May 26 13:28:27 2011
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: John Snow <snowjn@aol.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:46 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] History question.
In-Reply-To: <alpine.BSO.2.00.1105261253510.31737@morgaine.smi.sendmail.com>
References: <4DDEA412.6030305@aol.com>
	<alpine.BSO.2.00.1105261253510.31737@morgaine.smi.sendmail.com>
Message-ID: <4DDEB7EB.2090508@aol.com>

Philip Guenther wrote:
> On Thu, 26 May 2011, John Snow wrote:
>   
>> My question is simply, why?  Why is the sequence number needed when the 
>> command specified a UID, and the UID must be included in the response.  
>> Seems to me the UID command should have a UID response. snow.
>>     
>
> Right now, a client can parse a FETCH response at any time, inserting it 
> into its cache without having to consider any context of pending commands.  
> Indeed, the server can send FETCH responses at any time (modulus TCP 
> flow-control/deadlock concerns), and it's *required* to do so for flag 
> changes.  Sometimes using the UID and sometimes using msgno would make 
> such unsolicited FETCH responses ambiguous.
>
> Philip Guenther
>   

A UID fetch response could just as easily be handled at any time.

 From the example:

   Example:    C: A999 UID FETCH 4827313:4828442 FLAGS
               S: * 23 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen) UID 4827313)
               S: * 24 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen) UID 4827943)
               S: * 25 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen) UID 4828442)
               S: A999 OK UID FETCH completed

       why not this instead?

   Example:    C: A999 UID FETCH 4827313:4828442 FLAGS
               S: * UID 4827313 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen))
               S: * UID 4827943 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen) )
               S: * UID 4828442 FETCH (FLAGS (\Seen) )
               S: A999 OK UID FETCH completed


snow.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20110526/2f767f16/attachment.html>
