summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/imap/docs/rfc/rfc4315.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'imap/docs/rfc/rfc4315.txt')
-rw-r--r--imap/docs/rfc/rfc4315.txt451
1 files changed, 0 insertions, 451 deletions
diff --git a/imap/docs/rfc/rfc4315.txt b/imap/docs/rfc/rfc4315.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index c026f422..00000000
--- a/imap/docs/rfc/rfc4315.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,451 +0,0 @@
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Network Working Group M. Crispin
-Request for Comments: 4315 December 2005
-Obsoletes: 2359
-Category: Standards Track
-
-
- Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) - UIDPLUS extension
-
-Status of This Memo
-
- This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
- Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
- improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
- Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
- and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
-
-Copyright Notice
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
-
-Abstract
-
- The UIDPLUS extension of the Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP)
- provides a set of features intended to reduce the amount of time and
- resources used by some client operations. The features in UIDPLUS
- are primarily intended for disconnected-use clients.
-
-1. Introduction and Overview
-
- The UIDPLUS extension is present in any IMAP server implementation
- that returns "UIDPLUS" as one of the supported capabilities to the
- CAPABILITY command.
-
- The UIDPLUS extension defines an additional command. In addition,
- this document recommends new status response codes in IMAP that
- SHOULD be returned by all server implementations, regardless of
- whether or not the UIDPLUS extension is implemented.
-
- The added facilities of the features in UIDPLUS are optimizations;
- clients can provide equivalent functionality, albeit less
- efficiently, by using facilities in the base protocol.
-
-1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
-
- In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
- server, respectively.
-
-
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 1]
-
-RFC 4315 IMAP - UIDPLUS Extension December 2005
-
-
- The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
- "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to
- be interpreted as described in [KEYWORDS].
-
- A "UID set" is similar to the [IMAP] sequence set; however, the "*"
- value for a sequence number is not permitted.
-
-2. Additional Commands
-
- The following command definition is an extension to [IMAP] section
- 6.4.
-
-2.1. UID EXPUNGE Command
-
- Arguments: sequence set
-
- Data: untagged responses: EXPUNGE
-
- Result: OK - expunge completed
- NO - expunge failure (e.g., permission denied)
- BAD - command unknown or arguments invalid
-
- The UID EXPUNGE command permanently removes all messages that both
- have the \Deleted flag set and have a UID that is included in the
- specified sequence set from the currently selected mailbox. If a
- message either does not have the \Deleted flag set or has a UID
- that is not included in the specified sequence set, it is not
- affected.
-
- This command is particularly useful for disconnected use clients.
- By using UID EXPUNGE instead of EXPUNGE when resynchronizing with
- the server, the client can ensure that it does not inadvertantly
- remove any messages that have been marked as \Deleted by other
- clients between the time that the client was last connected and
- the time the client resynchronizes.
-
- If the server does not support the UIDPLUS capability, the client
- should fall back to using the STORE command to temporarily remove
- the \Deleted flag from messages it does not want to remove, then
- issuing the EXPUNGE command. Finally, the client should use the
- STORE command to restore the \Deleted flag on the messages in
- which it was temporarily removed.
-
- Alternatively, the client may fall back to using just the EXPUNGE
- command, risking the unintended removal of some messages.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 2]
-
-RFC 4315 IMAP - UIDPLUS Extension December 2005
-
-
- Example: C: A003 UID EXPUNGE 3000:3002
- S: * 3 EXPUNGE
- S: * 3 EXPUNGE
- S: * 3 EXPUNGE
- S: A003 OK UID EXPUNGE completed
-
-3. Additional Response Codes
-
- The following response codes are extensions to the response codes
- defined in [IMAP] section 7.1. With limited exceptions, discussed
- below, server implementations that advertise the UIDPLUS extension
- SHOULD return these response codes.
-
- In the case of a mailbox that has permissions set so that the client
- can COPY or APPEND to the mailbox, but not SELECT or EXAMINE it, the
- server SHOULD NOT send an APPENDUID or COPYUID response code as it
- would disclose information about the mailbox.
-
- In the case of a mailbox that has UIDNOTSTICKY status (as defined
- below), the server MAY omit the APPENDUID or COPYUID response code as
- it is not meaningful.
-
- If the server does not return the APPENDUID or COPYUID response
- codes, the client can discover this information by selecting the
- destination mailbox. The location of messages placed in the
- destination mailbox by COPY or APPEND can be determined by using
- FETCH and/or SEARCH commands (e.g., for Message-ID or some unique
- marker placed in the message in an APPEND).
-
- APPENDUID
-
- Followed by the UIDVALIDITY of the destination mailbox and the UID
- assigned to the appended message in the destination mailbox,
- indicates that the message has been appended to the destination
- mailbox with that UID.
-
- If the server also supports the [MULTIAPPEND] extension, and if
- multiple messages were appended in the APPEND command, then the
- second value is a UID set containing the UIDs assigned to the
- appended messages, in the order they were transmitted in the
- APPEND command. This UID set may not contain extraneous UIDs or
- the symbol "*".
-
- Note: the UID set form of the APPENDUID response code MUST NOT
- be used if only a single message was appended. In particular,
- a server MUST NOT send a range such as 123:123. This is
- because a client that does not support [MULTIAPPEND] expects
- only a single UID and not a UID set.
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 3]
-
-RFC 4315 IMAP - UIDPLUS Extension December 2005
-
-
- UIDs are assigned in strictly ascending order in the mailbox
- (refer to [IMAP], section 2.3.1.1) and UID ranges are as in
- [IMAP]; in particular, note that a range of 12:10 is exactly
- equivalent to 10:12 and refers to the sequence 10,11,12.
-
- This response code is returned in a tagged OK response to the
- APPEND command.
-
- COPYUID
-
- Followed by the UIDVALIDITY of the destination mailbox, a UID set
- containing the UIDs of the message(s) in the source mailbox that
- were copied to the destination mailbox and containing the UIDs
- assigned to the copied message(s) in the destination mailbox,
- indicates that the message(s) have been copied to the destination
- mailbox with the stated UID(s).
-
- The source UID set is in the order the message(s) were copied; the
- destination UID set corresponds to the source UID set and is in
- the same order. Neither of the UID sets may contain extraneous
- UIDs or the symbol "*".
-
- UIDs are assigned in strictly ascending order in the mailbox
- (refer to [IMAP], section 2.3.1.1) and UID ranges are as in
- [IMAP]; in particular, note that a range of 12:10 is exactly
- equivalent to 10:12 and refers to the sequence 10,11,12.
-
- This response code is returned in a tagged OK response to the COPY
- command.
-
- UIDNOTSTICKY
-
- The selected mailbox is supported by a mail store that does not
- support persistent UIDs; that is, UIDVALIDITY will be different
- each time the mailbox is selected. Consequently, APPEND or COPY
- to this mailbox will not return an APPENDUID or COPYUID response
- code.
-
- This response code is returned in an untagged NO response to the
- SELECT command.
-
- Note: servers SHOULD NOT have any UIDNOTSTICKY mail stores.
- This facility exists to support legacy mail stores in which it
- is technically infeasible to support persistent UIDs. This
- should be avoided when designing new mail stores.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 4]
-
-RFC 4315 IMAP - UIDPLUS Extension December 2005
-
-
- Example: C: A003 APPEND saved-messages (\Seen) {297}
- C: Date: Mon, 7 Feb 1994 21:52:25 -0800 (PST)
- C: From: Fred Foobar <foobar@example.com>
- C: Subject: afternoon meeting
- C: To: mooch@example.com
- C: Message-Id: <B27397-0100000@example.com>
- C: MIME-Version: 1.0
- C: Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
- C:
- C: Hello Joe, do you think we can meet at 3:30 tomorrow?
- C:
- S: A003 OK [APPENDUID 38505 3955] APPEND completed
- C: A004 COPY 2:4 meeting
- S: A004 OK [COPYUID 38505 304,319:320 3956:3958] Done
- C: A005 UID COPY 305:310 meeting
- S: A005 OK No matching messages, so nothing copied
- C: A006 COPY 2 funny
- S: A006 OK Done
- C: A007 SELECT funny
- S: * 1 EXISTS
- S: * 1 RECENT
- S: * OK [UNSEEN 1] Message 1 is first unseen
- S: * OK [UIDVALIDITY 3857529045] Validity session-only
- S: * OK [UIDNEXT 2] Predicted next UID
- S: * NO [UIDNOTSTICKY] Non-persistent UIDs
- S: * FLAGS (\Answered \Flagged \Deleted \Seen \Draft)
- S: * OK [PERMANENTFLAGS (\Deleted \Seen)] Limited
- S: A007 OK [READ-WRITE] SELECT completed
-
- In this example, A003 and A004 demonstrate successful appending and
- copying to a mailbox that returns the UIDs assigned to the messages.
- A005 is an example in which no messages were copied; this is because
- in A003, we see that message 2 had UID 304, and message 3 had UID
- 319; therefore, UIDs 305 through 310 do not exist (refer to section
- 2.3.1.1 of [IMAP] for further explanation). A006 is an example of a
- message being copied that did not return a COPYUID; and, as expected,
- A007 shows that the mail store containing that mailbox does not
- support persistent UIDs.
-
-4. Formal Syntax
-
- Formal syntax is defined using ABNF [ABNF], which extends the ABNF
- rules defined in [IMAP]. The IMAP4 ABNF should be imported before
- attempting to validate these rules.
-
- append-uid = uniqueid
-
- capability =/ "UIDPLUS"
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 5]
-
-RFC 4315 IMAP - UIDPLUS Extension December 2005
-
-
- command-select =/ uid-expunge
-
- resp-code-apnd = "APPENDUID" SP nz-number SP append-uid
-
- resp-code-copy = "COPYUID" SP nz-number SP uid-set SP uid-set
-
- resp-text-code =/ resp-code-apnd / resp-code-copy / "UIDNOTSTICKY"
- ; incorporated before the expansion rule of
- ; atom [SP 1*<any TEXT-CHAR except "]">]
- ; that appears in [IMAP]
-
- uid-expunge = "UID" SP "EXPUNGE" SP sequence-set
-
- uid-set = (uniqueid / uid-range) *("," uid-set)
-
- uid-range = (uniqueid ":" uniqueid)
- ; two uniqueid values and all values
- ; between these two regards of order.
- ; Example: 2:4 and 4:2 are equivalent.
-
- Servers that support [MULTIAPPEND] will have the following extension
- to the above rules:
-
- append-uid =/ uid-set
- ; only permitted if client uses [MULTIAPPEND]
- ; to append multiple messages.
-
-5. Security Considerations
-
- The COPYUID and APPENDUID response codes return information about the
- mailbox, which may be considered sensitive if the mailbox has
- permissions set that permit the client to COPY or APPEND to the
- mailbox, but not SELECT or EXAMINE it.
-
- Consequently, these response codes SHOULD NOT be issued if the client
- does not have access to SELECT or EXAMINE the mailbox.
-
-6. IANA Considerations
-
- This document constitutes registration of the UIDPLUS capability in
- the imap4-capabilities registry, replacing [RFC2359].
-
-7. Normative References
-
- [ABNF] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
- Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, October 2005.
-
-
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 6]
-
-RFC 4315 IMAP - UIDPLUS Extension December 2005
-
-
- [IMAP] Crispin, M., "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL -
- VERSION 4rev1", RFC 3501, March 2003.
-
- [KEYWORDS] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
- Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
-
- [MULTIAPPEND] Crispin, M., "Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) -
- MULTIAPPEND Extension", RFC 3502, March 2003.
-
-8. Informative References
-
- [RFC2359] Myers, J., "IMAP4 UIDPLUS extension", RFC 2359, June
- 1998.
-
-9. Changes from RFC 2359
-
- This document obsoletes [RFC2359]. However, it is based upon that
- document, and takes substantial text from it (albeit with numerous
- clarifications in wording).
-
- [RFC2359] implied that a server must always return COPYUID/APPENDUID
- data; thus suggesting that in such cases the server should return
- arbitrary data if the destination mailbox did not support persistent
- UIDs. This document adds the UIDNOTSTICKY response code to indicate
- that a mailbox does not support persistent UIDs, and stipulates that
- a UIDPLUS server does not return COPYUID/APPENDUID data when the COPY
- (or APPEND) destination mailbox has UIDNOTSTICKY status.
-
-Author's Address
-
- Mark R. Crispin
- Networks and Distributed Computing
- University of Washington
- 4545 15th Avenue NE
- Seattle, WA 98105-4527
-
- Phone: (206) 543-5762
- EMail: MRC@CAC.Washington.EDU
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 7]
-
-RFC 4315 IMAP - UIDPLUS Extension December 2005
-
-
-Full Copyright Statement
-
- Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
-
- This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions
- contained in BCP 78, and except as set forth therein, the authors
- retain all their rights.
-
- This document and the information contained herein are provided on an
- "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/SHE REPRESENTS
- OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET
- ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
- INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE
- INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED
- WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
-
-Intellectual Property
-
- The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
- Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
- pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
- this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
- might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
- made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
- on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
- found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
-
- Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any
- assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an
- attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of
- such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this
- specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at
- http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
-
- The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any
- copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary
- rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement
- this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-
- ipr@ietf.org.
-
-Acknowledgement
-
- Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the
- Internet Society.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-Crispin Standards Track [Page 8]
-