Aaron Stone wrote:
Hans Kristian Rosbach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
If we can find another way to comply with the RFC besides automatic
database sequence numbers, we will definitely go for it. Any ideas,
however crazy, are welcome... although the really crazy ones will probably
just be used to help come up with simple straightforward plans ;-)
Is it such that all messages gets a unique incrementing id system-wide
or account-wide?
I believe it is on a per-mailbox basis. At this point, we all need to dig
into the RFC, though. Here it is:
http://www.faqs.org/rfcs/rfc3501.html
2.3.1.1. Unique Identifier (UID) Message Attribute
A 32-bit value assigned to each message, which when used with the
unique identifier validity value (see below) forms a 64-bit value
that MUST NOT refer to any other message in the mailbox or any
subsequent mailbox with the same name forever. Unique identifiers
are assigned in a strictly ascending fashion in the mailbox; as each
message is added to the mailbox it is assigned a higher UID than the
message(s) which were added previously. Unlike message sequence
numbers, unique identifiers are not necessarily contiguous.
Looks like you're correct on the per-mailbox thing :)
That makes things a lot easier.
Ilja
--
Ilja Booij
IC&S B.V.
Stadhouderslaan 57
3583 JD Utrecht
www.ic-s.nl
T algemeen: 030 6355730
T direct: 030 6355739
F: 030 6355731
E: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
