38 lines
1.5 KiB
Plaintext
38 lines
1.5 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From mrc at CAC.Washington.EDU Fri Nov 16 09:50:16 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] FETCH/STORE on out-of-range sequence number
|
|
In-Reply-To: <2123708120.202451195235056495.JavaMail.root@dogfood.zimbra.com>
|
|
References: <2123708120.202451195235056495.JavaMail.root@dogfood.zimbra.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <alpine.OSX.0.99999.0711160945210.3800@pangtzu.panda.com>
|
|
|
|
On Fri, 16 Nov 2007, Dan Karp wrote:
|
|
> If there are 50 messages in the mailbox and a client requests
|
|
> A001 FETCH 52 (FLAGS)
|
|
> then what are the acceptable server responses?
|
|
|
|
A001 BAD Invalid sequence number.
|
|
|
|
> I'm currently
|
|
> treating it as an example of RFC 2180 section 4.1.2 and returning
|
|
> A001 NO Some of the requested messages no longer exist
|
|
|
|
It's a BAD because there is no way that a compliant client can reference
|
|
an invalid sequence number. The rules for EXPUNGE preclude it.
|
|
|
|
RFC 2180 section 4.1.2 was a terrible mistake and no server should ever do
|
|
that. 4.1.3 is also pretty bad, and indicates a buggy server (or at least
|
|
buggy mail store), but it is better than 4.1.2. A server should do either
|
|
4.1.1 or 4.1.4 instead.
|
|
|
|
Note as well that RFC 2180 is Informational. The fact that an
|
|
Informational RFC says something does not make it normative.
|
|
|
|
-- 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.
|
|
|