IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Filip Navara <filip.navara@gmail.com> Mon, 20 February 2012 12:43 UTC

Return-Path: <filip.navara@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: imap5@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: imap5@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F16321F86F0 for <imap5@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.765
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.765 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.833, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, SARE_HTML_USL_OBFU=1.666]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id CknQ9qYxRcxH for <imap5@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com (mail-tul01m020-f172.google.com [209.85.214.172]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3592621F872B for <imap5@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by obbwd15 with SMTP id wd15so8184414obb.31 for <imap5@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:26 -0800 (PST)
Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of filip.navara@gmail.com designates 10.60.3.72 as permitted sender) client-ip=10.60.3.72;
Authentication-Results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of filip.navara@gmail.com designates 10.60.3.72 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=filip.navara@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=filip.navara@gmail.com
Received: from mr.google.com ([10.60.3.72]) by 10.60.3.72 with SMTP id a8mr9763376oea.19.1329741806855 (num_hops = 1); Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:26 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=Vv7NzPcIqxOwn7+tpwySkiy/OBWcheeMLx6KGkTGJpo=; b=jGj6s6QsPcypcNOOle6e6vFKpoZcjONixgHg3fAEf2qlv4HtpynZho2753tsUDtGf3 kmNPsQx2L8XxdaBemiLDIe2KD6Xe2MOEgIqUlfH0cEgHdFtoRHYP44LElIr6xNJn71xJ A087Bb16fboO3zh4gulSdaqrNHFkeSdZX6EyQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.60.3.72 with SMTP id a8mr8390158oea.19.1329741806121; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.182.74.8 with HTTP; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 04:43:25 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <4F423CE4.5060103@qbik.com>
References: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1202161626400.30682@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <4F3D6E57.8010301@qbik.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1202171127330.30682@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <4F3F4F8F.3040601@qbik.com> <1329550573.30138.140661038121885@webmail.messagingengine.com> <alpine.LSU.2.00.1202191832430.12769@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk> <20120219192604.GA11323@launde.brong.net> <4F415C07.3040100@qbik.com> <20120219220835.GB12549@launde.brong.net> <4F417EF5.6030809@qbik.com> <20120219233901.GA13600@launde.brong.net> <4F41952B.8020809@qbik.com> <1329738117.22774.140661038826265@webmail.messagingengine.com> <4F423CE4.5060103@qbik.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:43:25 +0100
Message-ID: <CAD8HnzwaaHjPTwsze0ACOTgPdEUgyrJZ62CDyasxE0eKd8rDcA@mail.gmail.com>
From: Filip Navara <filip.navara@gmail.com>
To: Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e89a8fb1ee2aff330304b964a36c"
Cc: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>, "Discussion on drastically slimming-down IMAP." <imap5@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [imap5] Feature set? - was Re: Designing a new replacement protocol for IMAP
X-BeenThere: imap5@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion on drastically slimming-down IMAP." <imap5.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/imap5>, <mailto:imap5-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imap5>
List-Post: <mailto:imap5@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:imap5-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5>, <mailto:imap5-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 12:43:32 -0000

JYFI, we (eM Client, www.emclient.com) do use BURL in some cases.

F.

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:

>
> We didn't implement BURL (HURL).
>
> It was just too far over the insanity horizon to write an IMAP client for
> that purpose.
>
> Especially since I don't know of a single client that uses it.
>
> So the MUA takes care of BCC in sent items, when it uploads the file there
> after sending with SMTP.
>
>
> On 21/02/2012 12:41 a.m., Bron Gondwana wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 01:34 PM, Adrien de Croy wrote:
>>
>>> i'm just talking about good old file system file copy, without parsing.
>>>
>> Just our of interest, are you doing this with BURL now?
>>
>> If not, then a requirement to translate during copying is not an
>> additional
>> imposition on top of the IO and CPU hit you're currently getting from
>> two different copies being sent through your system(s).
>>
>> If so, how do you handle the case where the client wants to store a
>> BCC field in their "Sent Items" folder as a record of who it was
>> really sent to?
>>
>> Bron.
>>
>
> --
> Adrien de Croy - WinGate Proxy Server - http://www.wingate.com
>
> ______________________________**_________________
> imap5 mailing list
> imap5@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/**listinfo/imap5<https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5>
>

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email