Re: [Imap-protocol] QRESYNC and new arrivals which get deleted immediately through VANISHED

Hi Jan,

On 17/07/2012 18:11, Jan Kundrát wrote:
> On 06/08/12 18:02, Jan Kundrát wrote:
>> Finally, my last question is why does QRESYNC require me to issue an
>> ENABLE QRESYNC at all? I feel like the SELECT ... QRESYNC should be
>> enough to tell the server that I'm really expecting the VANISHED
>> responses.
>
> I think I have found an answer to this -- if the client doesn't have 
> any cached state for a particular mailbox, it cannot really SELECT 
> QRESYNC that.

Right.

> If it tried to use a HIGHESTMODSEQ = 1, it would risk an enormous 
> amount of data being transferred in VANISHED EARLIER as the server 
> would have to inform about each and every expunge which has happened 
> in the mailbox since its creation. This is due to the known-uids ABNF 
> item format which doesn't provide any way of sending "nope, I don't 
> know about any UIDs" -- the list can either be missing, or contain at 
> least one item.

Yes.

> If I understand everything correctly, ENABLE QRESYNC is therefore 
> still required as long as one wants to receive VANISHED instead of 
> EXPUNGE.

Exactly.

> My apologies for assuming that it's useless :).
>
> Also is probably means that a QRESYNC-capable clients have to use 
> SELECT ... CONDSTORE when they open a mailbox for the first time.

This can be an option.

> I'd appreciate if someone could verify these assumptions -- they look 
> plausible to me, but I didn't see any flaw in my previous reasoning, 
> either :).

_______________________________________________
Imap-protocol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman2.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol