RFC 2683: IMAP4 Implementation Recommendations
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
The IMAP4 specification describes a rich protocol for use in building clients and servers for storage, retrieval, and manipulation of electronic mail. Because the protocol is so rich and has so many implementation choices, there are often trade-offs that must be made and issues that must be considered when designing such clients and servers. This document attempts to outline these issues and to make recommendations in order to make the end products as interoperable as possible. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC2683
- Published
- September 1999
- Authors
- B. Leiba
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- Legacy
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 23
- Also known as
- —
- Updated by:
- RFC 7162
Topics
Referenced by
One later RFC formally updates or obsoletes part of this document.
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 2359IMAP4 UIDPLUS extensionObsoleted
June 1998
- RFC 2221IMAP4 Login ReferralsCurrent
October 1997
- RFC 2195IMAP/POP AUTHorize Extension for Simple Challenge/ResponseCurrent
September 1997
- RFC 2192IMAP URL SchemeObsoleted
September 1997
- RFC 2180IMAP4 Multi-Accessed Mailbox PracticeCurrent
July 1997
- RFC 2095IMAP/POP AUTHorize Extension for Simple Challenge/ResponseObsoleted
January 1997
- RFC 2088IMAP4 non-synchronizing literalsObsoleted
January 1997
- RFC 2087IMAP4 QUOTA extensionObsoleted
January 1997
Also filed under
About this page
The document record above — title, authors, date, status, stream, area, relationships, DOI and errata — is imported verbatim from the public RFC Editor index. The “in plain English” section is editorial: written by The metasystema editorial team, not part of the RFC. Where the two differ, the RFC text governs.
Last checked against the RFC Editor index on . RFCs are never revised after publication; changes are issued as new documents.
Data sources · Editorial policy · Report a correction · What is an RFC?