Re: [Imap-protocol] Is there some way to detect servers which automatically add sent messages to the Sent mailbox?

FWIW, I find Alexey's postaddress extension rather useful in practise - it
allows the data to be sent once, it remains in control of the MUA
(specifically, the organization of your mail remains within the remit of
the MUA), and it's zero-RTT (in as much as you just add another pipelined
RCPT to your ESMTP transaction).

BURL is useful in concert for remote assembly of messages (forwarding
messages or attachments); less useful as a generic mechanism because it
radically increases the number of round-trips.

The setup of BURL from an MUA's perspective is awkward, though, because the
BURL capable submission server provides no hints as to which IMAP server is
to be used, and vice-versa, making discovery a bit hit and miss.
Postaddress (I've a horrible feeling that Alexey's going to correct the
name any second) on the other hand gives you the magic email address to use
out of an extended LIST, making discovery trivial.

So my summary is that after several years of actively using BURL, I'd
rather have postaddress, which satisfies pretty much everything, but also
keeps us within the Submission+IMAP model. But yeah, BURL's handy for the
1% of messages that postaddress doesn't handle.

As a final note, while I've no particular objection to a model where the
remote message store can also handle submission (X.400 does this via, erm,
P7, and seems to work just fine), I'm more than a little wary of
introducing such a radical change in model. I don't think I'm clever enough
to spot all the things we may miss.

Dave.

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