RFC Errata
RFC 3501, "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 4rev1", March 2003
Note: This RFC has been obsoleted by RFC 9051
Source of RFC: IETF - NON WORKING GROUPArea Assignment: app
See Also: RFC 3501 w/ inline errata
Errata ID: 3032
Status: Verified
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT
Reported By: Bron Gondwana
Date Reported: 2011-11-15
Verifier Name: Peter Saint-Andre
Date Verified: 2011-11-15
Section 6.3.1 says:
Responses: REQUIRED untagged responses: FLAGS, EXISTS, RECENT
REQUIRED OK untagged responses: UNSEEN, PERMANENTFLAGS,
UIDNEXT, UIDVALIDITY
[...]
OK [UNSEEN <n>]
The message sequence number of the first unseen
message in the mailbox. If this is missing, the
client can not make any assumptions about the first
unseen message in the mailbox, and needs to issue a
SEARCH command if it wants to find it.
It should say:
Responses: REQUIRED untagged responses: FLAGS, EXISTS, RECENT
REQUIRED OK untagged responses: PERMANENTFLAGS,
UIDNEXT, UIDVALIDITY, UNSEEN (if any unseen exist)
[...]
OK [UNSEEN <n>]
The message sequence number of the first unseen
message in the mailbox. If there are any unseen
messages in the mailbox, an UNSEEN response MUST
be sent, if not it MUST be omitted.
If this is missing, the client cannot make any
assumptions about the first unseen message in the
mailbox, and needs to issue a SEARCH command if
it wants to find it.
Notes:
There is a conflict between "REQUIRED" on the UNSEEN response and having no value to send. This change documents the approach taken by existing servers.