Thanks for the various replies on this. I have a follow-up question about sequence numbers. Again, apologies if it's been covered before.
A client has a view of a mailbox and can use sequence numbers to refer to particular messages. If the sequence numbers change, the client gets notified via the untagged responses. The client can also use UIDs to refer to messages. There's a window where a client hasn't yet picked up an untagged response and therefore uses a sequence number that doesn't refer to the intended message. It could get round this by using UIDs - but I was wondering whether any servers correct the sequence numbers. I'm thinking of something along the lines of "she said message 5, but I know that she hasn't yet seen the untagged response saying that message 4 has been expunged, and if she had she'd have said message 4, so that's what I will use". Or are sequence numbers just inherently untrustworthy when you have multiple access going on, and everyone should really use UIDs? Regards, Edward Hibbert Internet Applications Group Data Connection Ltd Tel: +44 131 662 1212 Fax: +44 131 662 1345 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: http://www.dataconnection.com
