Re: The IMAP APPENDLIMIT Extension

Jan Kundrát <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.ietf.imapext
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Sunday, 4 January 2015 20:23:50 CEST, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> Tru,e but I think we need to distinguish between what is 
> "allowed" (ACL) vs what the size limit is (APPENDLIMIT). As 
> others have noted, the limit may well reach zero because of some 
> quota on the mailbox. I don't think that the ACL should depend 
> on the the available quota in that case (i.e., the "i" right 
> would remain set because if messages were deleted, APPENDs would 
> be OK).

I do not think that the per-mailbox APPENDLIMIT should take quotas into 
account at all. If you send an * OK [APPENDLIMIT 10] at a time your quota 
is almost exhausted, then you have to have a channel to asynchronously 
update that information when space gets freed. This means unsolicited * OK 
[APPENDLIMIT ...] on selected mailboxes, something pretty ugly already. How 
do you propose to pass this information for non-selected mailboxes where 
the client has already asked in STATUS or LIST-STATUS?

Seriously, if this switches from a rarely changing limit which is valid for 
at least the duration of the IMAP session, then you have to invent a 
syncing mechanism. That starts to get a bit complex soon enough.

With kind regards,
Jan

-- 
Trojitá, a fast Qt IMAP e-mail client -- http://trojita.flaska.net/

_______________________________________________
imapext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.