Arnt Gulbrandsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Paul Jarc writes: >> For the SELECT command, what should a server do for OK [UNSEEN n] >> when there are no unseen messages? Omit that part of the response? > > Yes. If you look at the RFC 3501 formal grammar, you will see that > UNSEEN is followed by an nz-number, so you can't legally send 0.
That tells me what I can't send, but not what I should send instead, if anything. Mark says to send nothing, so that's what I'll do, but I don't think this can be clearly deduced from the text of the RFC. >> Right now, my greeting looks like "* OK [READ-ONLY] ...". ... > In IMAP, mailboxes are read-only, not servers. The above greeting matches the grammar in the RFC. I thought I had also read somewhere explicitly that [READ-ONLY] was specifically useful in greetings, but I can't find that text now. If clients in fact don't take notice of such a greeting, then it seems putting CAPABILITY data there instead would certainly be more useful. > How would that client know that in your server's case, TLS isn't > valuable? It can't. It sees that you offer AUTH=PLAIN, and must > assume that it should take its usual precautions.) Would it make sense to omit AUTH=PLAIN as well, then? Or would that be too abusive of clients' expectations? paul
