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

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



The following reply was made to PR imap/2837; it has been noted by GNATS.

From: David Champion <dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: bug-any@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Cc: 
Subject: Re: imap/2837: MYRIGHTS not understood by Mirapoint IMAP4PROXY
Date: Thu, 8 Mar 2007 15:41:23 -0600

 * On 2007.03.08, in <E1HPPx1-0000ND-Sx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
 *      "Kyle Wheeler" <kyle-mutt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
 >  
 >  Probably should... particularly given that it seems to be viewed as 
 >  "okay" (even in the various IMAP RFC's) for the CAPABILITY response to 
 >  change after authentication (and STARTTLS). I still don't think it's 
 >  acceptable to *REMOVE* capabilities when you authenticate, or to claim 
 
 It seems to be fairly common, at least -- not just Mirapoint.  For
 example, servers may take "STARTTLS" off the capability list after you
 start TLS, or take AUTH=XYZ off once you authenticate.  It seems like a
 reasonable way of telling the client that they shouldn't do it again.
 (Maybe there are client/server combinations that support re-login, but
 if a server doesn't, it seems prudent to stop advertising that it's an
 available option.)
 
 
 >  technically claim all kinds of nonsense in their initial CAPABILITY 
 >  response if they wanted to. :)
 
 But that's the whole point of CAPABILITY. :) You can claim anything, as
 long as you accept responsibility for what compliant clients do with
 that.  If it's undefined, a compliant client ignores it and there's no
 problem.
 
 -- 
  -D.    dgc@xxxxxxxxxxxx        NSIT    University of Chicago