Re: [Imap-protocol] Unsolicited server responses

>> Given that the server can unilaterally send updates to the 
>> client, why was the IDLE extension useful/necessary?
>
> I'm no expert but I don't think I have seen an IMAP server that 
> sends unsolicited EXISTS or EXPUNGE responses when not in IDLE 
> mode.

I've co-written one that sends a sends a very small number of responses and 
then stops, which hasn't caused problems. I've heard that another server 
sent an unlimited number of responses using blocking i/o, and that would 
cause problems if the client wasn't listening.

IIRC more servers send unsolicited responses occasionally, to keep NAT 
middleboxes from discarding the connection.

> "While the spec [RFC3501 I assume] actually does allow a server 
> to push EXISTS responses asynchronously, a client can't expect 
> this behavior and must poll."

That's the key.

Arnt

_______________________________________________
Imap-protocol mailing list
[email protected]
http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol