Re: [imap5] Feature set? - was Re: Designing a new replacement protocol for IMAP

[Adrien de Croy <[e-mail]>]

The obvious application for server-side parsing is providing the ability 
to search the store without having to download the whole thing first. In 
many cases it's simply not possible otherwise.

I think it's a very compelling feature.  Which for me means server-side 
parsing should stay.

One could argue that to a certain level it could be simplified.  
Providing a complete nested body structure is only really relied on by 
some clients.  Many just download the whole, or parts and then parse 
client-side.

But I don't know to what level, and since we have an existing working 
mechanism.

As for always connected vs offline & connect-as-required.  I think these 
are 2 useful cases.  In-house corporate use can benefit from always 
connected, but it doesn't scale well for huge providers.  Being able to 
re-establish some state without having to go through the whole setup 
phase could be an interesting option to look into, e.g. some reusable 
token (good for a certain amount of time since last use) would allow the 
server to cache the "session" and the client to re-establish quickly.

Adrien


On 25/02/2012 8:48 a.m., Brandon Long wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 24, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Arnt Gulbrandsen
> <[e-mail]>  wrote:
>> On 02/24/2012 01:09 AM, Brandon Long wrote:
>>> Of course, if we aren't parsing the messages on the server, we have to
>>> ask why we're implementing IMAP5 and not POP4
>> Some time ago you wrote that IMAP is the de facto API for talking to
>> gmail. I understand that you offer POP too, but IMAP's what people use,
>> right?
> Yes.  For simple backups / migrations, they'll tend to use POP which
> is easier to deal with, but for anything that requires actually
> writing to the store or getting specific pieces of information,
> performing searches, obviously IMAP is the better choice.
>
> I was being mostly facetious about POP4.  There may be an argument for
> a simpler protocol which does 2-way syncing in a log-like fashion with
> a side-order of mail sending.  That's essentially what the Android
> Gmail client uses (our own http based two-way sync based on actual
> changes going across).  But, I tend to be a believer in the off-line
> syncing clients instead of the always connected ones.
>
> Brandon
> _______________________________________________
> imap5 mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5

-- 
Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.com