Re: [lemonade] Regarding CONDSTORE IMAP extension

[Samsung SVL <[e-mail]>]

Hi Dave/Alexy,

I have gone through the https://ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-qresync-rfc5162bis/ draft. Regarding the issue reported earlier, some server explicitly expects ENABLE command to increment the HIGHESTMODSEQ and some server automatically increments. To make the thing clear and also to follow the consistent behavior across various IMAP clients. It would be better to insist a point about enabling the CONDSTORE service in the server by sending ENABLE CONDSTORE command.

So, even-though server advertises the supported capability, its client responsibility to send ENABLE CONDSTORE command to enable the service. In case, if IMAP server did not support the ENABLE extension, then how client should enable the service can also mentioned to make it clear for client implementation. 

Please consider and if you feel its worthy, kindly update the draft. 

Regards,
Jay

>________________________________
> From: Dave Cridland <[e-mail]>
>To: Samsung SVL <[e-mail]> 
>Cc: Chris Newman <[e-mail]>; "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]> 
>Sent: Tuesday, 3 December 2013, 0:52
>Subject: Re: [lemonade] Regarding CONDSTORE IMAP extension
> 
>
>
>Just to remind folk, the update to RFC 4551 - now also documenting QRESYNC as well - is currently in Working Group Last Call, which ends on the 6th of December.
>
>
>https://ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-qresync-rfc5162bis/
>
>
>
>If you think this needs to be clearer in the new document, please let the document authors, and the mailing list at [e-mail] know.
>
>
>
>On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Samsung SVL <[e-mail]> wrote:
>
>Hi Chris,
>>
>>
>>Thanks for your clarification.
>>
>>
>>Regards,
>>Jay
>>
>>
>>
>>>________________________________
>>> From: Chris Newman <[e-mail]>
>>>To: Samsung SVL <[e-mail]>; [e-mail] 
>>>Sent: Monday, 2 December 2013, 18:10
>>>
>>>Subject: Re: [lemonade] Regarding CONDSTORE IMAP extension
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>--On December 2, 2013 13:51:24 -0800 Samsung SVL <[e-mail]> 
>>>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> Kindly clarify my below query regarding "CONDSTORE" IMAP Extension.
>>>>
>>>> When IMAP server advertises the "CONDSTORE" support as part of
>>>> CAPABILITIES, client assumes that server support IMAP CONSTORE
>>>> extension. 
>>>>
>>>> As
 per RFC 4551,  client issues SELECT command  for a mailbox in the
>>>> below format and receives the response with HIGHESTMODSEQ value as  "1"
>>>>
>>>> C: A142 SELECT INBOX
>>>>
>>>> During the subsequent SELECT command, client receives "HIGHESTMODSEQ"
>>>> value always set to "1". Its not getting incremented with respect to the
>>>> changes in the mailbox. 
>>>>
>>>> Some IMAP server changes the HIGHESTMODSEQ value only when client issues
>>>> SELECT command in the below format.
>>>>
>>>> C:A142 SELECT "INBOX" (QRESYNC ("UIDVALIDITY" "HIGHESTMODSEQ"))
>>>>
>>>> Kindly clarify which format is right one, because most of the IMAP server
>>>> behaves differently. 
>>>
>>>Technically, the former command is correct only if you've previously issued 
>>>a condstore-enabling command (or don't want to use condstore) and the 
>>>latter is correct only if the server advertises QRESYNC and you have issued 
>>>"ENABLE QRESYNC" previously. For more details see RFC 4551 and RFC 5162.
>>>
>>>Have you tried using:
>>>
>>>C: A142 SELECT INBOX (CONDSTORE)
>>>
>>>That's a condstore-enabling command that servers advertising the CONDSTORE 
>>>capability are required to support. Servers are free to not return 
>>>HIGHESTMODSEQ at all until a condstore-enabling command occurs, and then 
>>>they MUST return either HIGHESTMODSEQ or NOMODSEQ.
>>>
>>>Of course, if a server is returning HIGHESTMODSEQ and not updating it after 
>>>flag
 changes, that server may have a bug, so you may have to fallback to 
>>>not using CONDSTORE with that server and just do a full resync every time. 
>>>You might want to report that bug to the server vendor so they have the 
>>>opportunity to fix it in a subsequent release.
>>>
>>>        - Chris
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>lemonade mailing list
>>[e-mail]
>>https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade
>>Supplemental Web Site:
>>http://www.standardstrack.com/ietf/lemonade
>>
>
>
>