Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) - UIDPLUS extension
RFC 4315
| Document | Type |
RFC - Proposed Standard
(December 2005; No errata)
Obsoletes RFC 2359
Was draft-crispin-imap-rfc2359bis (individual in app area)
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| Author | Mark Crispin | ||
| Last updated | 2015-10-14 | ||
| Stream | Internet Engineering Task Force (IETF) | ||
| Formats | plain text html pdf htmlized (tools) htmlized bibtex | ||
| Stream | WG state | (None) | |
| Document shepherd | No shepherd assigned | ||
| IESG | IESG state | RFC 4315 (Proposed Standard) | |
| Action Holders |
(None)
|
||
| Consensus Boilerplate | Unknown | ||
| Telechat date | |||
| Responsible AD | Scott Hollenbeck | ||
| Send notices to | (None) | ||
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]