Re: [Imap-protocol] Re: Suspend/Restore feature proposal

Quoting Brandon Long <[email protected]>:

> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Michael M Slusarz  
> <[email protected]>wrote:
>
>> Quoting Brandon Long <[email protected]>:
>>
>>  Have you considered not re-establishing a connection every 10s?  This is a
>>> connected protocol, not http.
>>>
>>
>> From a webmail perspective: if you could tell me how to maintain a
>> consistent IMAP connection using nothing more than current IMAP commands
>> and an out-of-the box HTTP server, I would be ecstatic.  That's what users
>> demand our software works with, so that's what we need to code for.
>>
>> I don't have the UI information in front of me right now, but a user
>> initiating an action every 10 seconds, at least when managing messages in a
>> mailbox (loading a message to read, deleting, copying/moving, reporting as
>> spam), seems like a reasonable estimate for discussion purposes.  That's
>> where I got the 10 second value from.
>>
>
> And this seems to imply, to me, that you'd be better off with the
> resume/disconnected session stuff from p-imap/lemonade that I pointed to
> before.
>
> After all, you are likely to need to do at least a select of the same
> folder for most of those new connections.

This is probably getting too client implementation specific... but in  
our dynamic client a large number of browser requests (XMLHttpRequest)  
are polling requests.  No need to select a mailbox.  So any solution  
that REQUIREs a selection of mailbox on resuming is worthless in a  
practical sense.

michael

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