RFC 4549: Synchronization Operations for Disconnected IMAP4 Clients
In plain English — editorial summary, not part of the RFC
This document attempts to address some of the issues involved in building a disconnected IMAP4 client. In particular, it deals with the issues of what might be called the "driver" portion of the synchronization tool: the portion of the code responsible for issuing the correct set of IMAP4 commands to synchronize the disconnected client in the way that is most likely to make the human who uses the disconnected client happy. This note describes different strategies that can be used by disconnected clients and shows how to use IMAP protocol in order to minimize the time of the synchronization process. This note also lists IMAP extensions that a server should implement in order to provide better synchronization facilities to disconnected clients. This memo provides information for the Internet community.
Document record
- Document ID
- RFC4549
- Published
- June 2006
- Authors
- A. Melnikov
- Status
- INFORMATIONAL
- Stream
- IETF
- Area
- —
- Pages
- 35
- Also known as
- —
Topics
Related documents
Ranked automatically by shared keywords, IETF area and stream — not by editorial selection.
- RFC 4550Internet Email to Support Diverse Service Environments (Lemonade) ProfileObsoleted
June 2006
- RFC 4315Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) - UIDPLUS extensionCurrent
December 2005
- RFC 4314IMAP4 Access Control List (ACL) ExtensionCurrent
December 2005
- RFC 4959IMAP Extension for Simple Authentication and Security Layer (SASL) Initial Client ResponseCurrent
September 2007
- RFC 4978The IMAP COMPRESS ExtensionCurrent
August 2007
- RFC 5161The IMAP ENABLE ExtensionCurrent
March 2008
- RFC 5162IMAP4 Extensions for Quick Mailbox ResynchronizationObsoleted
March 2008
- RFC 5182IMAP Extension for Referencing the Last SEARCH ResultCurrent
March 2008
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?