wasm-demo/demo/ermis-f/imap-protocol/cur/1600094978.22538.mbox:2,S

38 lines
1.3 KiB
Plaintext

MBOX-Line: From tjs at psaux.com Sun Oct 8 14:43:59 2017
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Tim Showalter <tjs@psaux.com>
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:55 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Is server re-use of UID OK?
In-Reply-To: <38137c2b-f1f1-2bed-e22f-2aea7fa50ac3@chartertn.net>
References: <38137c2b-f1f1-2bed-e22f-2aea7fa50ac3@chartertn.net>
Message-ID: <CAByav=gBnVkLg+4z90ewBvKRVtOrEQ7XESfirEQ1dyx=Sb0MXw@mail.gmail.com>
On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Gene Smith <gds@chartertn.net> wrote:
> Copy a message with UID 1267 from Inbox to Mbox and deleted it in Inbox.
> With Inbox selected:
>
> C: aaa UID COPY 1267 "Mbox"
> S: aaa OK [COPYUID 123456789 1267 1007] UID COPY completed
> C: bbb UID store 1267 +Flags (\Deleted)
>
> C: ccc UID COPY 1007 "Inbox"
> S: ccc OK [COPYUID 987654321 1007 1267] UID COPY completed
> C: ddd UID store 1007 +Flags (\Deleted)
>
> Does this seem like acceptable imap server behavior?
>
No, this is a violation. Both messages have UID 1267, and if there is no
intervening EXPUNGE, the first message still exists when the second one
overwrites it. Neither behavior is remotely permissible.
Tim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/pipermail/imap-protocol/attachments/20171008/2e02a247/attachment.html>