Re: Sorting Extension - was Re: IMAP4: reordered mailbox during session
Mike Macgirvin <MAX@netscape.com> Wed, 27 August 1997 17:32 UTC
Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa10219; 27 Aug 97 13:32 EDT
Received: from lists2.u.washington.edu (root@lists2.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.1]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid NAA10944 for <ietf-archive@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 13:36:09 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from host (lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13]) by lists2.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with SMTP id KAA20123; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:26:12 -0700
Received: from mx5.u.washington.edu (mx5.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.6]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id KAA45830 for <imap@lists.u.washington.edu>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:25:41 -0700
Received: from jimi-hendrix.mcom.com (h-205-217-228-33.netscape.com [205.217.228.33]) by mx5.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.04) with ESMTP id KAA07320 for <imap@u.washington.edu>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:25:35 -0700
Received: from Netscape.COM (metal.mcom.com [205.217.228.164]) by jimi-hendrix.mcom.com (Netscape Messaging Server 3.0) with ESMTP id AAA28885; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:25:03 -0700
Message-Id: <3404627F.50ED0E4F@Netscape.COM>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 10:23:11 -0700
Sender: IMAP-owner@u.washington.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: Mike Macgirvin <MAX@netscape.com>
To: Cyrus Daboo <daboo@cyrusoft.com>
Cc: imap@u.washington.edu, Steve Hole <steve@esys.ca>
Subject: Re: Sorting Extension - was Re: IMAP4: reordered mailbox during session
References: <462163.3081669966@sardis.cyrusoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------512E260CFBE1C8A5128DC218"
X-Sender: "Mike Macgirvin" <max@netscape.com>
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
> What is the status (if any) of the server side sorting extenions proposal? > I Ask this in reference to the thread (partially quoted below) about > messages being copied into mailboxes and always appearing at the end of > the mailbox. Presumably, if a server side sort is enabled for the mailbox > in question, the message may sort to some other location. The question is > whether the action of sorting is initiated by the client, or whether the > server will keep a mailbox sorted as new messages are copied into it. > Presumably such issues are addressed in the SORT proposal? It's been in experimental status for a couple of years now, and no draft has ever been written. If you want to see something happen, probably best to get a description from Mark on what he's done and then run with it. The experimental extension (as I recall, it's been a while since I looked at it) is client initiated - i.e. the client submits a SORT command and gets back a list of messages representing the order. The server does nothing to maintain ordering; it just runs the requested sort and spits back the results. There are options to set the ordering algorithm and also to supply a message list and/or search filter.
- Sorting Extension - was Re: IMAP4: reordered mail… Cyrus Daboo
- Re: Sorting Extension - was Re: IMAP4: reordered … Mike Macgirvin
- re: Sorting Extension - was Re: IMAP4: reordered … Mark Crispin
- re: Sorting Extension - was Re: IMAP4: reordered … Cyrus Daboo
- re: Sorting Extension - was Re: IMAP4: reordered … Mark Crispin