55 lines
2.2 KiB
Plaintext
55 lines
2.2 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From robsiemb at google.com Tue Jan 30 19:42:59 2007
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Rob Siemborski <robsiemb@google.com>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:38 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] A few MAILBOX-REFERRALS and NAMESPACE questions
|
|
In-Reply-To: <1616193014.36111170214172038.JavaMail.root@dogfood.zimbra.com>
|
|
References: <1616193014.36111170214172038.JavaMail.root@dogfood.zimbra.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <5b93232d0701301942j66a9f184h485b50a99aa464d4@mail.gmail.com>
|
|
|
|
On Jan 30, 2007 7:29 PM, Dan Karp <dkarp@zimbra.com> wrote:
|
|
|
|
> RFC 2193 states that
|
|
>
|
|
> Remote mailboxes and their inferiors, that are accessible only via
|
|
> referrals SHOULD NOT appear in LIST and LSUB responses issued against
|
|
> the user's home server. They MUST appear in RLIST and RLSUB
|
|
> responses issued against the user's home server.
|
|
>
|
|
> For RLIST, must the server *validate* the existence of mailboxes belonging to remote accounts? In other words, if "Biff" is on a remote host and the client issues the command
|
|
>
|
|
> A003 RLIST "" "/user/Biff/nosuchfolder"
|
|
>
|
|
> may the server blindly return a corresponding untagged LIST response
|
|
>
|
|
> * LIST () "/" "/user/Biff/nosuchfolder"
|
|
>
|
|
> or does the server have to verify the existence of the "nosuchfolder" mailbox in Biff's namespace before returning such a LIST response?
|
|
|
|
I'd argue that the correct thing to do is, indeed, verify that
|
|
nosuchfolder exists before returning it. However, since clients have
|
|
to deal with the race where a folder is presented and then deleted
|
|
before the SELECT command can be issued anyway, this isn't as big a
|
|
deal as it seems.
|
|
|
|
Do other servers implement MAILBOX-REFERRALS? The only server I know
|
|
of that does this is the Cyrus server, which doesn't distinguish much,
|
|
because it is willing to proxy if the client doesn't do an RLIST
|
|
anyway, so its all the same.
|
|
|
|
> Similarly, RFC 2193 states that
|
|
>
|
|
> Hierarchy referrals,
|
|
> in which a client would be required to connect to the remote server
|
|
> to issue a LIST to discover the inferiors of a mailbox are not
|
|
> addressed in this document.
|
|
>
|
|
> Did a consensus develop as to what should be returned when a user issues
|
|
>
|
|
> A004 RLIST "" /user/Biff/INBOX/%"
|
|
|
|
The server would just return what it knew about, no?
|
|
|
|
-Rob
|
|
|