Re: [imapext] Fwd: About connection pooling

Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Wed, 30 September 2020 11:07 UTC

Return-Path: <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 16E113A0B2E for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:07:21 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gulbrandsen.priv.no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ySu3hpAg9tdA for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:07:19 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80D683A0ADF for <imapext@ietf.org>; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 04:07:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 566CDC014F; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 12:13:27 +0100 (IST)
Authentication-Results: stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=gulbrandsen.priv.no
Authentication-Results: stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gulbrandsen.priv.no; s=mail; t=1601464407; bh=gTVCJMS5PGn29/+safyu0CJVOqMurL7pbzVB0MZgItc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=Rw+px7/rBUkhoRAh8dOz5fdELkO/+TnXsBi0RZWosUToo+haAGQhzkSrNxCDAvspC trRUm1XDO2IcQKzrwedn0aTJqyq1/7Hl7Zn/orI7sEIA5vQOt0vckC+pFjC9iEBtMd +5rVqLiT5ANpOk5dViJDOcs3qi92kqwau/Alpmhw=
Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.2.0) with esmtpsa id 1601464406-19142-19140/9/237; Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:13:26 +0000
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
To: imapext@ietf.org
Cc: Rohan Mehta <rohanmehta0077@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 13:18:08 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <e90008f2-fde5-4596-a1a9-4dc6d8ea9753@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
In-Reply-To: <40f8d9ec-2387-4e38-819d-fdb4407c5709@Spark>
References: <CAO0d3bLXzYynT-9BxDy2DS4nHGzVM2hBTAQyyy2nhu-s1FmsNg@mail.gmail.com> <CAO0d3bJ_ma7R+0Xti0sO8fEL9g1qJWfs8F25O7GODT2r4eEzaQ@mail.gmail.com> <f53b4661-1d6c-4243-b76d-169ba1a33017@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <40f8d9ec-2387-4e38-819d-fdb4407c5709@Spark>
User-Agent: Trojita/0.7; Qt/5.11.3; xcb; Linux; Devuan GNU/Linux 3 (beowulf)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/imapext/YcPFLUhdnHBg4SN5G0FyitqSk2I>
Subject: Re: [imapext] Fwd: About connection pooling
X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions <imapext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/imapext>, <mailto:imapext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/imapext/>
List-Post: <mailto:imapext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:imapext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext>, <mailto:imapext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 30 Sep 2020 11:07:21 -0000

On Wednesday 30 September 2020 05:17:00 CEST, Rohan Mehta wrote:
> Hi Arnt,
> Thanks for providing your views.
> We have seen a few implementations of IMAP using connection 
> pooling around. That’s was our point of digging out, so thanks 
> again. We will plan accordingly.

I believe that my response reflects not my opinion, but rather the opinion 
of the author of RFC 3501. (He's no longer around to respond himself, 
unfortunately.)

FYI I've written an implenmentation that pools connections myself, but it 
doesn't pool IMAP conections. I suggest that you look closely at the code 
you have found. If you find IMAP connection pooling I would be very 
interested in the precise command sequences it sends.

Arnt