Timo Sirainen wrote:

> On Tue, 2003-03-04 at 18:21, Steve Hole wrote:
> > > That's what I meant with "fetching BODY", except I remembered BODY was
> > > enough. But still, fetching BODYSTRUCTURE is pretty much useless
> > > cpu/bandwidth usage just for one paperclip icon.
> >
> > No, it's not.
> >
> > A well written client should fetch BODYSTRUCTURE as preferentially before
> > fetching any other body data.
>
> But if I'm just browsing message headers, only thing I need is ENVELOPE.
> BODYSTRUCTURE is needed only when actually opening the message.

?

> >    The amount of bandwidth used in the
> > fetch, with the possible exception of handheld devices (which are
> > exceedingly unlikely to be able to display attachment data anyway), is
> > simply a non-issue.   For the vast majority of mail clients in use it is
> > round trips that kill -- latency, not bandwidth.
>
> It's also unnecessary job for server if it's not really needed.

Many servers cache BODYSTRUCTURE responses, so it is fast.

Regards,
Alexey
__________________________________________
R & D, ACI Worldwide/MessagingDirect
Watford, UK

Work Phone: +44 1923 81 2877
Home Page: http://orthanc.ab.ca/mel

I speak for myself only, not for my employer.
__________________________________________


Reply via email to