Re: Communciator 4.02 Imap EXPUNGE problem

"Barry Leiba, Multimedia Messaging" <leiba@watson.ibm.com> Wed, 27 August 1997 15:33 UTC

Received: from cnri by ietf.org id aa08107; 27 Aug 97 11:33 EDT
Received: from lists.u.washington.edu (root@lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13]) by cnri.reston.va.us (8.8.5/8.7.3) with ESMTPid LAA10374 for <ietf-archive@CNRI.Reston.VA.US>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:36:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from host (server@lists.u.washington.edu [140.142.56.13]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with SMTP id IAA17806; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:26:47 -0700
Received: from mx4.u.washington.edu (mx4.u.washington.edu [140.142.33.5]) by lists.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.05) with ESMTP id IAA17684 for <imap@lists.u.washington.edu>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:26:23 -0700
Received: from mx1.cac.washington.edu (mx1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.1]) by mx4.u.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.04) with ESMTP id IAA17047 for <imap@u.washington.edu>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:26:22 -0700
Received: from igw3.watson.ibm.com (igw3.watson.ibm.com [198.81.209.18]) by mx1.cac.washington.edu (8.8.4+UW97.07/8.8.4+UW97.04) with ESMTP id IAA14622 for <imap@cac.washington.edu>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 08:26:19 -0700
Received: from mailhub2.watson.ibm.com (mailhub2.watson.ibm.com [9.2.250.15]) by igw3.watson.ibm.com (8.8.7/07-11-97) with ESMTP id LAA09690 for <imap@cac.washington.edu>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:19:36 -0400
Received: from uranus.diz.watson.ibm.com (uranus.diz.watson.ibm.com [9.2.35.85]) by mailhub2.watson.ibm.com (8.8.2/07-14-97) with SMTP id LAA16613 for <imap@cac.washington.edu>; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:26:17 -0400
Message-Id: <SIMEON.9708271114.N@uranus.diz.watson.ibm.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:26:14 -0400
Sender: IMAP-owner@u.washington.edu
Precedence: bulk
From: "Barry Leiba, Multimedia Messaging" <leiba@watson.ibm.com>
To: imap <imap@cac.washington.edu>
Subject: Re: Communciator 4.02 Imap EXPUNGE problem
In-Reply-To: <441915.3081669630@sardis.cyrusoft.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET="US-ASCII"
X-Authentication: none
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 beta -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN

On Wed, 27 Aug 97 11:20:30 -0400 Cyrus Daboo <daboo@cyrusoft.com> wrote:
> Can we go back to the original point in this discussion:
> 
> My question is how are you supposed to deal with shared mailboxes if you
> don't allow simultaneous access to a single mailbox? From my perspective I
> see shared mailboxes as one of the more important benefits of IMAP over
> POP, and I'm certainly promoting this to potential IMAP users now that
> we've added ACL suuport into our client.

Go back to a point that Mark was making in a couple of his responses:  IMAP 
*does not guarantee* shared access to mailboxes.  Yes, the protocol allows 
it (POP explicitly forbids it), and yes, many/most servers support it.  But 
some servers in some configurations may not, generally because of 
limitations in the back-end mail store.

The ability to have shared mailboxes *is* one of the strong points of the 
IMAP protocol, but you (as someone designing a client, as someone 
installing a mail system, or as someone recommending things to others) must 
remember that any particular server configuration may or may not support 
this.  If shared mailboxes are important to you or to your customers, be 
sure you select a server configuration that supports that.  And if you're 
designing a client, be sure you operate well with servers that don't 
support it.

Barry Leiba, Multimedia Messaging  (leiba@watson.ibm.com)
http://www.research.ibm.com/people/l/leiba