64 lines
2.6 KiB
Plaintext
64 lines
2.6 KiB
Plaintext
MBOX-Line: From mrc at CAC.Washington.EDU Tue Sep 13 08:01:07 2005
|
|
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
|
|
From: Mark Crispin <mrc@CAC.Washington.EDU>
|
|
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:36 2018
|
|
Subject: [Imap-protocol] SELECT of same mailbox
|
|
In-Reply-To: <D9ECB8614A9A1340BC8944F8C8B311690124C1BD@daebe102.NOE.Nokia.com>
|
|
References: <D9ECB8614A9A1340BC8944F8C8B311690124C1BD@daebe102.NOE.Nokia.com>
|
|
Message-ID: <Pine.OSX.4.63.0509130752100.1609@pangtzu.panda.com>
|
|
|
|
On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Corby.Wilson@nokia.com wrote:
|
|
> This is confusing the heck out of me.
|
|
> There should not be this level of ambiguity anywhere in any RFC.
|
|
|
|
I don't think that there is any ambiguity.
|
|
|
|
Cyrus expanded the meaning of the word "failed" to incorporate the BAD
|
|
response, and arrived at an absurd conclusion.
|
|
|
|
The entire point of the BAD response is to have a third state other than
|
|
success and failure. BAD means, in effect, "huh?".
|
|
|
|
> The way I interpreted the statements:
|
|
>
|
|
> OK - Command Successfully Executed
|
|
> BAD - Command failed and the state of any part of the server is exactly
|
|
> the same as it was before the command was submitted (except for maybe
|
|
> the Z flag). This can be a syntax error, a hardware failure on the
|
|
> server side, or executing two commands at the same time that collide
|
|
> with each other (no proper atomicity).
|
|
> NO - The command was executed but something prevented successful
|
|
> completion. State may have changed meaning the client should do
|
|
> appropriate cleanup if necessary.
|
|
|
|
This is basically the correct interpretation, with one exception.
|
|
|
|
You say:
|
|
the Z flag). This can be a syntax error, a hardware failure on the
|
|
server side, or executing two commands at the same time that collide
|
|
with each other (no proper atomicity).
|
|
|
|
What is "the Z flag"?
|
|
|
|
Why would a hardware failure on the server side cause a BAD? Are you
|
|
thinking about untagged BAD?
|
|
|
|
It's a stretch to say that "executing two commands at the same time that
|
|
collide with each other (no proper atomicity)" causes a BAD. It could, on
|
|
the grounds that the command is not recognized in the state machine, but
|
|
that assumes an FSM parser. Many IMAP FSM parsers just recognize the
|
|
states outlined in the specification (Not Authenticated, Authenticated,
|
|
Selected), and do not try to have states to prevent command collisions.
|
|
|
|
> I had assumed this was the case, but now I see that the meaning of these
|
|
> changes throughout the document and I will need to revisit each command.
|
|
|
|
Why do you say that?
|
|
|
|
-- 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.
|
|
|