RFC INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL – VERSION 4rev1, March Canonical URL: ; File formats . [RFC ] IMAP/POP AUTHorize Extension for Simple [RFC ] INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL – VERSION 4rev1. RFC List. RFC. Problem Solved. Plan for new Protocol. RFC Internet Message Access Protocol – Version 4. Replaced by See

Author: Mikagar Vikasa
Country: Malawi
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Business
Published (Last): 3 February 2006
Pages: 235
PDF File Size: 3.97 Mb
ePub File Size: 20.28 Mb
ISBN: 364-9-94786-990-5
Downloads: 53665
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Voodookasa

Explicity allow space for extention. But this one has a problem, it doesn’t let you sort across folders, which makes it only half the solution. Non-authorative addendum to RFC Ideally not too different – reuse as much as possible.

Email Unicode and email.

Has some best-practices how well-behaving IMAP servers should behave. This mechanism avoids requiring clients to download every message in the mailbox in order to perform these searches.

The current version is defined by RFC An IMAP server typically listens on port number For instance, the specification states that each message stored on the server has a “unique id” to allow ikap clients to identify messages they have already seen between sessions.

These flags are stored on the server, so different clients accessing the same mailbox at different times can detect state changes made by other clients.

Doesn’t go far enough – particularly across folders. It will be less human-typing-friendly, but more machine friendly. Need to fix the sort as well.

Internet Message Access Protocol

Definitely, need to keep this – language negotiation needs to be part of the initial connection. The hard bit will be extra things like metadata, condstore, which it doesn’t seem to consider – so it’s incomplete. Much of this complexity e.

This draft was based upon the following earlier specifications: This experimental revision was called IMAP2bis; its specification was never published in non-draft form. Ideally composible actions – first characters of decoded value of part “1.

These clients need a mechanism omap synchronize state changes for messages within the mailbox. Definitely want token based access so you can authenticate once and then re-connect with the same token, at least during the same “session”.


evolution-kolab – RFC Reference

The Conditional Store facility also allows a client to quickly resynchronize mailbox flag changes. Extend more – allow both private and shared “special uses”, because there are contexts where both make sense. This specification does not define a generative grammar for URIs; that task is performed by the individual specifications of each URI scheme. Also fuzzy searching and partial response is an interesting area.

Usually rfd Internet e-mail is transmitted in MIME format, allowing messages to have a tree structure where the leaf nodes are any of a variety of single part content types and the non-leaf nodes are any of ijap variety of multipart types.

System flags indicate state information such as whether a message has been read. Multiple mailbox support also allows servers to provide access to shared and public folders. While some clients and servers preferentially use vendor-specific, proprietary protocols[3] almost all support POP and IMAP for retrieving e-mail – allowing 351 free choice between many e-mail clients such as Pegasus Mail or Mozilla Thunderbird to access these servers, and allows the clients to be used with other iimap.

Set a baseline of “required supported features” to get a better experience. There’s not even an attempt to include address book, calendaring, etc in this list yet!

Incoming e-mail messages are sent to an e-mail server that stores messages in the recipient’s e-mail box. The Conditional Store facility provides a protected update mechanism for message state information that can detect and resolve conflicts between multiple writing mail clients.

This specification defines the generic URI syntax and a process for resolving URI references that might be in relative form, along with guidelines and security considerations for the use of URIs on the Internet.

Unless the mail storage and searching algorithms on the server are carefully implemented, a client can potentially consume large amounts of server resources when searching massive mailboxes.


Attic/Evolution/Kolab/RFCReference – GNOME Wiki!

Not using sequence numbers would render many of these moot. IBM ‘s Notes client works in a similar fashion when communicating with a Domino server. E-mail clients using IMAP generally leave messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. This page was last edited on 27 Decemberat This memo has been defined to provide the definition of a common format for openly exchanging calendaring and scheduling information across the Internet.

Would love to make this more general – sort by a somewhat arbitrary function on the message. Retrieved 26 November The user retrieves the messages with an e-mail client that uses one of a number of e-mail retrieval protocols. Will need an Access Control mechanism.

Archived from the original on Examples include different clients working on behalf of the same user, and multiple users accessing shared mailboxes. IMAP was designed with the goal of permitting complete management of an email box by multiple email clients, therefore clients generally leave messages on the server until the user explicitly deletes them. An Email Filtering Language and all the extentions Support Sieve – possibly even sieve fragments as “run this filter on this mailbox”.

With the IDLE command, the server can tell the client that a mailbox status has changed. In doubt, RFC is authorative. The URI syntax defines a grammar that is a superset of all valid URIs, allowing an implementation to parse the common components of a URI reference without knowing the scheme-specific requirements of every possible identifier.

The IMAP specification has been criticised for being insufficiently strict and allowing behaviours that effectively negate its usefulness.