Re: [Imap-protocol] If Crispin were creating IMAP today how would it be different?
Imants Cekusins <[email protected]> Tue, 10 Mar 2015 00:44:00 +0100
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.imap.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CAP1qinY-d_fpmfwJ=04GUZhAnkZpPxzwMGfVdn8--4z=tJT5_w@mail.gmail.com> |
> Is your measurement data and methodology for this available online anywhere? this is a subjective assessment. Email servers are way too busy for what they deliver. I believe it is for these reasons: Parsing takes time. So does transfer decoding and charset conversion, unwrapping text, dot stuffing. It can be reduced to: no case conversion for commands; no parsing for commands even: a simple switch case statement suffice; no parsing for CRLF, empty line or DOT CRLF; actually, no content parsing at all is necessary for transmission; no transfer encoding / decoding (it is transferred as binary); no charset decoding: a single encoding is applied to the entire (text part of) the message. Simply from pragmatic point of view: if these tasks need not to be done, server is less busy and can process higher throughput. _______________________________________________ Imap-protocol mailing list [email protected] http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol