<<< Date Index >>>     <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: imap/2837: MYRIGHTS not understood by Mirapoint IMAP4PROXY



* On 2007.03.08, in <20070308194240.GP2924@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
*       "Kyle Wheeler" <kyle-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thursday, March  8 at 01:17 PM, quoth David Champion:
> >>This is, well, stupid. Not only do they claim ACL support, but 
> >>QUOTA support as well.
> >
> >I'm not sure I understand you.  I surely don't mean to defend Mirapoint 
> >(we use them, and I'm not a fan by a long shot) but it is legitimate 
> >to offer different capabilities when authenticated than when not, no?
> 
> True, but do they actually support ACL and QUOTA commands when you're 
> not authenticated? I doubt it. Essentially, they're *lying*.

They're lying *if* they don't support ACL and QUOTA when they say they
do.  If they're lying, then I agree the server is broken, but I don't
see that this changes anything -- it it were not lying and it changed
its capability list upon login, then the patch would still be necessary.

Is that a spec violation?  I might be wrong, but I didn't think so.

Anyway, you seem to be assuming that Mirapoint's server does not support
QUOTA or ACL before login, but I'm not sure why that assumption is
valid.


> I'm philosophically more comfortable with not providing the full list 
> of capabilities to people who aren't authenticated than I am with 

Is authentication necessary for mailbox access?  Does anonymous access
require login as an "anonymous" user?  Again, I could be wrong, but I
didn't think so.

-- 
 -D.    dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx        NSIT    University of Chicago