Re: [Imap-protocol] Combining LITERAL+ and BINARY

Quoting Timo Sirainen <[email protected]>:

> On Tue, 2012-11-27 at 21:05 +0100, Jan Kundrát wrote:
>> I was wondering what is the correct way of combining LITERAL+ [1]  
>> and BINARY [2]. Unless I'm mistaken, their interaction is not  
>> documented in any of the two RFCs. If I'm correct, this means that  
>> one can either benefit from 8bit APPENDs while blocking with  
>> synchronizing literals, or use LITERAL+ and do the encoding to some  
>> transport format on their own, not using BINARY. Is that right?
>
> It's not defined, so I don't think clients can legally use their
> combination.. Although Dovecot supports the obvious way of combining
> them: ~{n+}

This is explicitly allowed under RFC 4466.  E.g. Section 2.7:

    In addition, the non-terminal "literal8" defined in [BINARY] got
    extended to allow for non-synchronizing literals if both [BINARY] and
    [LITERAL+] extensions are supported by the server.

michael

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