wasm-demo/demo/ermis-f/imap-protocol/cur/1600095109.22807.mbox:2,S

44 lines
1.8 KiB
Plaintext

MBOX-Line: From witold.krecicki at firma.o2.pl Fri Jun 11 14:13:11 2010
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Witold =?utf-8?q?Kr=C4=99cicki?= <witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:43 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] IMAP MOVE extension
In-Reply-To: <201006110854.37969.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
References: <201006110854.37969.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
Message-ID: <201006112313.11799.witold.krecicki@firma.o2.pl>
Ok, to sum up the discussion after one day:
1. MOVE does not guarantee atomicity on some stores, but so does COPY. There
are stores on which atomicity of MOVE is guaranteed (most of those on which
COPY atomicity is also guaranteed)
2. MOVE does not improve speed on some stores, but will never be slower than
the usual cp/st/ex routine. It can improve speed on some specific, database-
backed stores
3. Pipelining of copy/store/expunge sequence seems like a good idea server-
side, but can be disastrous for client if the 'copy' fails (messages are lost
permanently), move is an all-or-nothing (atomic if there is no
filesystem/disk/etc. catastrophe on server side) command.
4. MOVE allows users to move messages even if they are close to their quota
limits, which is (formally and often practically) impossible with regular
copy/store/expunge sequence.
5. Move operation is already being implemented as an user extension (eg. XAOL-
MOVE) in both servers (AOL IMAP server) and clients (Thunderbird)
Revised version of draft can be found
http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-krecicki-imap-move-01.txt
here. Mostly grammar + some clarifications about atomicity.
--
Witold Kr?cicki
Grupa o2 Sp??ka z o.o., ul. Jutrzenki 177, 02-231 Warszawa,
KRS 0000140518, S?d Rejonowy dla m.st. Warszawy,
Kapita? zak?adowy 377.298,00 z?., NIP 521-31-11-513