From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/65100 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Steven E. Harris" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Courier-IMAP and UIDPLUS problem (was: New nnimap error with Gcc) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:49:12 -0700 Organization: SEH Labs Message-ID: <7yr6lm18by.fsf@fillmore.spawar.navy.mil> References: <83fy49tkep.fsf@torus.sehlabs.com> <87lkdy525s.fsf@mocca.josefsson.org> <83wsxip3wi.fsf@torus.sehlabs.com> <7ybqcr79q8.fsf@fillmore.spawar.navy.mil> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="=-=-=" X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1188413382 32724 80.91.229.12 (29 Aug 2007 18:49:42 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 18:49:42 +0000 (UTC) To: ding@gnus.org Original-X-From: ding-owner+M13611@lists.math.uh.edu Wed Aug 29 20:49:40 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ding-account@gmane.org Original-Received: from util0.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.18]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IQSbZ-0004fK-R8 for ding-account@gmane.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:49:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by util0.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IQSbS-0003yo-UN; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:49:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by util0.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1IQSbR-0003yW-Gh for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:49:21 -0500 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtp (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1IQSbM-0000zu-UA for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 13:49:21 -0500 Original-Received: from mail1.panix.com ([166.84.1.72]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1IQSbL-0005TW-00 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 20:49:15 +0200 Original-Received: from mailspool3.panix.com (mailspool3.panix.com [166.84.1.78]) by mail1.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9BB6029419 for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:49:11 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from fillmore.spawar.navy.mil (agns2.nosc.mil [128.49.24.155]) by mailspool3.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 56B691696C for ; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 14:49:11 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from seh by fillmore.spawar.navy.mil with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id JNJTM1-0001WW-LS for ding@gnus.org; Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:49:13 -0700 Mail-Followup-To: ding@gnus.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) XEmacs/21.4.20 (cygwin32) X-Spam-Score: -2.5 (--) List-ID: Precedence: bulk Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:65100 Archived-At: --=-=-= "Steven E. Harris" writes: > What more can I do to assist in fixing this problem? I just sent this message to my ISP regarding their mail servers: --=-=-= Content-Type: message/rfc822 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Steven E. Harris" Newsgroups: panix.questions Subject: Courier-IMAP support for UIDPLUS (RFC 2359) Organization: SEH Labs X-Draft-From: ("panix.questions") Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 11:45:33 -0700 Message-ID: <7y3ay22n2h.fsf@fillmore.spawar.navy.mil> User-Agent: Gnus/5.110007 (No Gnus v0.7) XEmacs/21.4.20 (cygwin32) Cancel-Lock: sha1:h8kTTYAlkFIgTTaVhrbJKR4iuNo= --text follows this line-- The Courier-IMAP server(s) listening at mail.panix.com annouce support for the UIDPLUS capability described in RFC 2359, but don't support it in practice. Here's the Capability string, reformatted for display: ,---- | * OK [CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 | UIDPLUS | CHILDREN NAMESPACE THREAD=REFERENCES | SORT QUOTA IDLE AUTH=PLAIN] | Courier-IMAP ready. Copyright 1998-2005 Double Precision, Inc. | See COPYING for distribution information. `---- Note that UIDPLUS is present. When I issue an APPEND or COPY command, the server responds with a traditional, non-UIDPLUS-related string: ,---- | 25 APPEND "INBOX.test" {200057} | ... | 25 OK Append completed. `---- Looking in Section 4.2 of the RFC¹, the server should have included an APPENDUID clause in between "OK" and "Append" above. My IMAP client is failing when copying and storing messages on the server because of this false advertisement of UIDPLUS support. Is this a feature that's been disabled by a configuration directive? Either the server should not be advertising this capability, or it should actually support it as advertised. Footnotes: ¹ http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc2359.html -- Steven E. Harris --=-=-= Is my interpretation of the UIDPLUS problem correct? -- Steven E. Harris --=-=-=--