Subject: Re: [MORG] New WG document:draft-ietf-morg-list-specialuse-00

From: Daniel Keen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 07:53:22 -0700

On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Timo Sirainen <[email-masked]> wrote:

> On Thu, 2010-02-11 at 20:31 -0500, Barry Leiba wrote:
> > I'd rather see a LISText option to list all of the special-use mailboxes:
> >
> >       C: T1 LIST (SPECIAL) "" "*"
> >       S: * LIST (\Sent) "/" SentMail
> >       S: * LIST (\Marked \Drafts) "/" MyDrafts
> >       S: * LIST (\Trash) "/" Trash
> >       S: * LIST (\Archive) "/" "Saved/Mail/Archive"
> >       S: T1 OK done
>
> I was also hoping that clients that currently support XLIST might
> automatically recognize these \flags even without XLIST
> capability/command. That could work only if regular LIST command listed
> those flags. But I haven't tested if that actually works.

(Responding belatedly…)

The iPhone client would not handle those flags without explicitly using an
XLIST command to garner them, unfortunately.

D

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:02:22 -0700

> XLIST command to garner them, unfortunately.

Does it break (when they are received in response to a LIST), or does
it just ignore them?

---

From: Dan Karp <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:07:24 -0700 (PDT)

> > (Responding belatedly…) The iPhone client would not handle those
> > flags without explicitly using an XLIST command to garner them,
> > unfortunately.
> 

Also, given how aggressively iTunes pushes phone OS updates, how hard
would it be to tweak the next dot release to accept them in vanilla
LIST responses?

---

From: Daniel Keen <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:13:31 -0700

> would it be to tweak the next dot release to accept them in vanilla

To Alexey:
It just ignores them.  We pass a NULL pointer to the extended attributes
array we use for XLIST, so it just walks over them instead of storing them
for later recall.

Dan:
I can't speak as to release schedules publicly.  It would be a decently
sized code change to fold the XLIST support down into LIST.  I'm happy this
is being standardized and to do it (and I'll have more comments at the
meeting today, unless folks would prefer them on the list), but I can't
speak to when we'd actually get around to it.

And then, even if we did, you'd have folks who still ignore updates... so if
you had a server like Zimbra that supports this (I didn't know you did, and
that's awesome!), you'll likely want to keep your XLIST implementation along
for the ride for a while.

D

---

From: Dan Karp <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2010 09:16:37 -0700 (PDT)

> And then, even if we did, you'd have folks who still ignore updates...
> so if you had a server like Zimbra that supports this (I didn't know
> you did, and that's awesome!), you'll likely want to keep your XLIST
> implementation along for the ride for a while.

We don't... yet.  If it turns out that it's worth it, I can put XLIST
into our next release.  I was holding off in the hopes that we'd have
a common standard, but backwards compatibility wouldn't hurt.