27 lines
1.0 KiB
Plaintext
27 lines
1.0 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From tss at iki.fi Tue Nov 27 16:41:14 2012
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:49 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Combining LITERAL+ and BINARY
|
|
In-Reply-To: <3DFB419C-6894-4703-BBB4-F156DF0B89DB@orthanc.ca>
|
|
References: <f99afad3-282b-4ab6-a576-330978724819@flaska.net>
|
|
<1354059359.2844.26.camel@innu>
|
|
<3DFB419C-6894-4703-BBB4-F156DF0B89DB@orthanc.ca>
|
|
Message-ID: <89092201-3988-4783-9888-99A5D34B2569@iki.fi>
|
|
|
|
On 28.11.2012, at 1.59, Lyndon Nerenberg wrote:
|
|
|
|
> On 2012-11-27, at 3:35 PM, Timo Sirainen wrote:
|
|
>
|
|
>> It's not defined, so I don't think clients can legally use their
|
|
>> combination.. Although Dovecot supports the obvious way of combining
|
|
>> them: ~{n+}
|
|
>
|
|
> And I consider that a legitimate operation.
|
|
>
|
|
> I'm planning to push an updated BINARY RFC, and I'll make sure this case is called out.
|
|
|
|
Nice. I noticed several other ambiguous issues when I implemented it a few months ago. I think I sent a mail about all of them to the IMAP mailing lists..
|
|
|
|
|