courier imap - IMAP

This is a discussion on courier imap - IMAP ; Hello, I had some test on courier-imap and it seems that there is a problem with this syntax : 03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ("References")]) 03 NO Error in IMAP command received by server. I would like to ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 5 of 5

courier imap

  1. Default courier imap

    Hello,

    I had some test on courier-imap and it seems that there is a problem
    with this syntax :

    03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ("References")])
    03 NO Error in IMAP command received by server.

    I would like to know if this is a bug with courier-imap (one more ?)
    or just a syntax error due to me ?

    I would say this is a bug in courier-imap because in RFC we can find :


    astring = 1*ASTRING-CHAR / string

    string = quoted / literal

    quoted = DQUOTE *QUOTED-CHAR DQUOTE


    header-fld-name = astring

    header-list = "(" header-fld-name *(SP header-fld-name) ")"

    which allows quoted strings for header names.


    (I did not try to use unusual parts of IMAP grammar)


    ------------ connection log ---------------

    * OK [CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 UIDPLUS CHILDREN NAMESPACE
    THREAD=ORDEREDSUBJECT THREAD=REFERENCES SORT QUOTA IDLE] Courier-IMAP
    ready. Copyright 1998-2003 Double Precision, Inc. See COPYING for
    distribution information.
    01 LOGIN XXX XXXX
    01 OK LOGIN Ok.
    02 SELECT INBOX
    * FLAGS (\Draft \Answered \Flagged \Deleted \Seen \Recent)
    * OK [PERMANENTFLAGS (\Draft \Answered \Flagged \Deleted \Seen)] Limited
    * 1 EXISTS
    * 0 RECENT
    * OK [UIDVALIDITY 1070417344] Ok
    02 OK [READ-WRITE] Ok
    03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ("References")])
    03 NO Error in IMAP command received by server.
    03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE)
    * 1 FETCH (UID 1 FLAGS () ENVELOPE ("Sun, 23 Mar 2003 19:49:31 +0100"
    "Fw: XPde Makes X11 Resemble Windows" (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) NIL NIL
    NIL "<etPan.3e7e01bb.4f65d224.d67@homer>"))
    03 OK FETCH completed.
    03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS (References)])
    * 1 FETCH (UID 1 FLAGS () ENVELOPE ("Sun, 23 Mar 2003 19:49:31 +0100"
    "Fw: XPde Makes X11 Resemble Windows" (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) (("DINH
    =?iso-8859-1?Q?Vi=EAt_Ho=E0?=" NIL "dinh.viet.hoa" "free.fr")) NIL NIL
    NIL "<etPan.3e7e01bb.4f65d224.d67@homer>") BODY[HEADER.FIELDS
    ("References")] {2}

    )
    03 OK FETCH completed.


    --
    DINH V. Hoa,

    etPan! - newsreader, mail user agent -- http://libetpan.sf.net/etpan


  2. Default Re: courier imap

    On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
    > 03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ("References")])
    > 03 NO Error in IMAP command received by server.


    This in a bug in that IMAP server.

    -- Mark --

    http://staff.washington.edu/mrc
    Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate.
    Si vis pacem, para bellum.

  3. Default Re: courier imap

    Mark Crispin writes:

    > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
    >> 03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ("References")])
    >> 03 NO Error in IMAP command received by server.

    >
    > This in a bug in that IMAP server.


    For more insight on Mark Crispin's opinions, see http://www.courier-mta.org/fud/



    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQA/zWalx9p3GYHlUOIRArDdAJ0QZLp36Wjsft+b6bz6Idd1j4QKHwCeIbrz
    PnxsfvSNzVqBljoYlegylvE=
    =fo5S
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


  4. Default Re: courier imap

    Sam wrote :

    > > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
    > >> 03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ("References")])
    > >> 03 NO Error in IMAP command received by server.

    > >
    > > This in a bug in that IMAP server.

    >
    > For more insight on Mark Crispin's opinions, see http://www.courier-mta.org/fud/


    does it prevent you from doing something compliant ?

    The new RFC 3501 with some errata made it precize the IMAP protocol.
    Then, why not following that ?

    Cyrus and Dovecot succeeded in being compliant, why not Courier-IMAP ?

    --
    DINH V. Hoa,

    etPan! - newsreader, mail user agent -- http://libetpan.sf.net/etpan


  5. Default Re: courier imap

    DINH Viet Hoa writes:

    > Sam wrote :
    >
    >> > On Wed, 3 Dec 2003, DINH Viet Hoa wrote:
    >> >> 03 FETCH 1 (UID FLAGS ENVELOPE BODY.PEEK[HEADER.FIELDS ("References")])
    >> >> 03 NO Error in IMAP command received by server.
    >> >
    >> > This in a bug in that IMAP server.

    >>
    >> For more insight on Mark Crispin's opinions, see http://www.courier-mta.org/fud/

    >
    > does it prevent you from doing something compliant ?


    Explain how “complaint” works when the underlying protocol is in a constant
    state of flux, but carries the same protocol version.

    > The new RFC 3501 with some errata made


    “some”???

    > it precize the IMAP protocol.


    No, there are some substantive differences between that, and RFC 2060.
    Meanwhile, the protocol version remained the same. So now you have two
    different protocols, with the same version.

    > Then, why not following that ?


    Follow what? Today's “definition” of IMAP, or next week/year's?

    > Cyrus and Dovecot succeeded in being compliant, why not Courier-IMAP ?


    Courier-IMAP is compliant, whatever that means, taking into account the
    sorry state of things.



    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

    iD8DBQA/zdPdx9p3GYHlUOIRAjZmAJ9UrLreUM2SxIso5TGIxheUDNrrmACeK+XI
    TCWAoO1WIK3qUQeDnnbA1Ss=
    =9l/u
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


+ Reply to Thread

Similar Threads

  1. IMAP_ENHANCEDIDLE in Courier Imap
    By Application Development in forum IMAP
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 03-15-2005, 07:05 PM
  2. courier-imap pop/imap limit
    By Application Development in forum IMAP
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02-07-2005, 08:12 AM
  3. Courier IMAP and maildir
    By Application Development in forum IMAP
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-02-2004, 06:43 PM
  4. Courier IMAP Srv. + offlineimap
    By Application Development in forum Mutt
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-10-2004, 03:43 PM
  5. RH7.3 Postfix & Courier-imap
    By Application Development in forum IMAP
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 12-04-2003, 06:28 AM