Re: [IMAP] APPEND Command Usage
Stuart Brandt <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.imapext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
If I'm understanding the proposal correctly, a server that has already
implemented CATENATE and now implements APPENDLIMIT is left in an
ambiguous state whenever the limit is exceeded. If it returns [TOOBIG],
then it's not compliant with the APPENDLIMIT recommendation. If it
returns [APPENDLIMIT x] then it's returning an unexpected response to
clients that have yet to implement APPENDLIMIT, thereby "breaking"
existing functionality.
On 12/9/14 5:16 PM, Jayantheesh S B wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Thanks for your response.
>
> New response code APPENDLIMIT will be returned as part of SELECT response to convey per mailbox limit
> and APPEND command response, if the APPENTLIMIT size is exceeded.
>
> C: t2 SELECT INBOX
> S: * 172 EXISTS
> S: * OK [APPENDLIMIT 257890] Maximum upload limit
> S: [...]
> S: t2 OK [READ-WRITE] SELECT completed
>
> C: t1 APPEND "Draft" (\SEEN \DRAFT) {98994952}
> S: t1 NO [APPENDLIMIT 257890] Exceeds the maximum allowed size
>
> Whereas TOOBIG response, does not covey the size restriction applied by the server.
>
> resp-text-code =/ toobig-response-code / badurl-response-code
> toobig-response-code = "TOOBIG"
>
> We feel APPENDLIMIT response can convey per mailbox size restriction and it can overcome the limitation of TOOBIG response.
>
> Please share your thoughts.
>
> Regards,
> Jay
_______________________________________________
imapext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext