Re: Major changes in draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-09
Alexey Melnikov <Alexey.Melnikov <at> isode.com>
2004-10-03 18:49:51 GMT
>What does a response with \Placeholder or \HasSubmailboxes mean when
>MATCHPARENT is used with REMOTE but without SUBSCRIBED? I see three
>a) it means the mailbox has at least one submailbox that is remote
>b) is means the mailbox has at least one submailbox, local or remote
>c) (b), but that's the same as \HasChildren, so MATCHPARENT shouldn't be
> allowed with just REMOTE: it should require SUBSCRIBED or some other
> option that affects the selection criteria.
>IMO, the current text says (b). Switching it to (a) would require a
>major rethink of the concept of "selected", or would effectively declare
>MATCHPARENT as having ad hoc interaction with each selection option. I
>would just as soon go with (c) and can help with text to that effect.
I don't think interpretation c) is very useful. This seems to make
existing complex situation even more complex. Currently the draft says
that b) is the case. If people think that a) is more appropriate, than
the WG needs to reconsider what REMOTE selection option means.
>Depending on how that question is settled, I may have an argument that
>in response to <LIST (SUBSCRIBED MATCHPARENT) "" "%">, responses with
>the \Placeholder flag also need the \Subscribed flag to avoid
As per off list discussion with Philip, I've changed the document to say
that \PlaceHolder/\HasSubMailboxes is only allowed when MATCHPARENT is
specified. In particular, this means that they are not allowed in LIST
responses not caused by the latest LIST command.
Philip's suggestion is that the server will send
"\Placeholder \Subscribed" in response to
<LIST (SUBSCRIBED MATCHPARENT) "" "%">.
This will mean "the mailbox is not really sibscribed, but the
\Placeholder flag was caused by SUBSCRIBED selection option.
IMHO, this seems to be overly complex. I think my change detailed above
would suffice, however if WG members feel otherwise, I would like to
hear their comments.