wasm-demo/demo/ermis-f/imap-protocol/cur/1600095054.22697.mbox:2,S

56 lines
1.9 KiB
Plaintext

MBOX-Line: From brong at fastmail.fm Fri Dec 28 11:33:10 2012
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm>
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:49 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] Missing UIDNEXT during mailbox synchronization
In-Reply-To: <20121228112725.Horde.cM7EjLQoqQDix9dQMs5KcA1@bigworm.curecanti.org>
References: <db123879-1082-4911-b7ce-3a861d62217a@flaska.net>
<20121228112725.Horde.cM7EjLQoqQDix9dQMs5KcA1@bigworm.curecanti.org>
Message-ID: <1356723190.15576.140661171078629.69B791C0@webmail.messagingengine.com>
On Fri, Dec 28, 2012, at 07:27 PM, Michael M Slusarz wrote:
> Quoting Jan Kundr?t <jkt@flaska.net>:
>
> > Hi,
> > I've received a report that Courier 4.5.0 sometimes doesn't return
> > UIDNEXT when syncing a mailbox, violating RFC 3501. Trojita used to
> > hit an assert in such case which was clearly my bug. This has now
> > been fixed.
>
> Courier definitely does this, and it is not against spec. From RFC 3501:
>
> OK [UIDNEXT <n>]
> The next unique identifier value. Refer to section
> 2.3.1.1 for more information. If this is missing,
> the client can not make any assumptions about the
> next unique identifier value.
And yet:
B. Changes from RFC 2060
34) Clarify UNSEEN, PERMANENTFLAGS, UIDVALIDITY, and UIDNEXT
responses in SELECT and EXAMINE. They are required now, but weren't
in older versions.
Sounds like it's supposed to be there in 3501. Also listed with REQUIRED.
> For cache purposes, you can workaround a missing UIDNEXT response by
> doing a 'UID FETCH * (UID)' in the mailbox.
Ouch.
> For empty mailboxes, use
> the returned UID value (which is defined as the UIDNEXT value).
> Otherwise, you can add 1 to the returned value and use this as the
> UIDNEXT-ish value.
The more interesting question is: what do you need to know it for anyway?
Bron.
--
Bron Gondwana
brong@fastmail.fm