67 lines
2.6 KiB
Plaintext
67 lines
2.6 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From imap at maclean.com Wed Apr 30 06:28:51 2014
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Pete Maclean <imap@maclean.com>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:52 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] FETCH order
|
|
In-Reply-To: <14D026C7F297AD44AC82578DD818CDD0344BC64F31@TUS1XCHEVSPIN35
|
|
.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM>
|
|
References: <201404292317.s3TNHSVi029561@mxout12.cac.washington.edu>
|
|
<14D026C7F297AD44AC82578DD818CDD0344BC64F31@TUS1XCHEVSPIN35.SYMC.SYMANTEC.COM>
|
|
Message-ID: <mailman.18.1528486492.22076.imap-protocol@mailman13.u.washington.edu>
|
|
|
|
Hi Neil,
|
|
|
|
That helps a lot. Indeed it is highly comforting. Thank you!
|
|
|
|
Pete
|
|
|
|
At 07:46 PM 4/29/2014, Neil Hunsperger wrote:
|
|
>Hi Pete,
|
|
>
|
|
>Symantec Desktop Email Encryption's IMAP proxy reorders the FETCH
|
|
>results that it returns to Windows and Mac IMAP clients to allow for
|
|
>more efficient batching of decryption. The product has worked this
|
|
>way for 6 or so years and I've heard no issues caused by the re-ordering.
|
|
>
|
|
>I hope this helps,
|
|
>-Neil
|
|
>
|
|
>-----Original Message-----
|
|
>From: Imap-protocol
|
|
>[mailto:imap-protocol-bounces@mailman13.u.washington.edu] On Behalf
|
|
>Of Pete Maclean
|
|
>Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 4:17 PM
|
|
>To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
>Subject: [Imap-protocol] FETCH order
|
|
>
|
|
>I am working with a customer that wants some changes made to my IMAP
|
|
>server to optimize the FETCHing of batches of full messages (such as
|
|
>during mailbox syncs). Currently the server always returns messages
|
|
>in ascending order by UID/MSN irrespective of the order in the FETCH
|
|
>command. In the case of this customer, messages have to be retrieved
|
|
>internally from one or more back ends and the time required to do
|
|
>this can vary considerably from message to message. We want to
|
|
>pipeline this retrieval so that those messages that can be retrieved
|
|
>most quickly are returned to the client first. The result would be
|
|
>that the client would receive the messages in an apparently random order.
|
|
>
|
|
>It is very clear that this is permitted by IMAP. It seems in the
|
|
>spirit of the protocol and there is some text in the definition of
|
|
>"sequence-set" that makes it explicit (although the way it is
|
|
>expressed could be much improved). However this leaves us with one
|
|
>concern. We observe that there exist clients that appear to only
|
|
>ever send FETCH commands with sequence sets in ascending order and we
|
|
>wonder if any of these would get messed up if they are sent the
|
|
>message data in a different order. Does anyone have any experience with this?
|
|
>
|
|
>Thanks,
|
|
>
|
|
>Pete Maclean
|
|
>
|
|
>_______________________________________________
|
|
>Imap-protocol mailing list
|
|
>Imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
>http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol
|
|
|
|
|