rfc1064.txt
来自「RFC 的详细文档!」· 文本 代码 · 共 1,459 行 · 第 1/4 页
TXT
1,459 行
Network Working Group M. Crispin
Request for Comments: 1064 SUMEX-AIM
July 1988
INTERACTIVE MAIL ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 2
Status of this Memo
This RFC suggests a method for workstations to dynamically access
mail from a mailbox server ("repository"). This RFC specifies a
standard for the SUMEX-AIM community and a proposed experimental
protocol for the Internet community. Discussion and suggestions for
improvement are requested. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
Introduction
The intent of the Interactive Mail Access Protocol, Version 2 (IMAP2)
is to allow a workstation or similar small machine to access
electronic mail from a mailbox server. IMAP2 is the protocol used by
the SUMEX-AIM MM-D (MM Distributed) mail system.
Although different in many ways from POP2 (RFC 937), IMAP2 may be
thought of as a functional superset of POP2, and the POP2 RFC was
used as a model for this RFC. There was a cognizant reason for this;
RFC 937 deals with an identical problem and it was desirable to offer
a basis for comparison.
Like POP2, IMAP2 specifies a means of accessing stored mail and not
of posting mail; this function is handled by a mail transfer protocol
such as SMTP (RFC 821). A comparison with the DMSP protocol of
PCMAIL can be found at the end of "System Model and Philosophy"
section.
This protocol assumes a reliable data stream such as provided by TCP
or any similar protocol. When TCP is used, the IMAP2 server listens
on port 143.
System Model and Philosophy
Electronic mail is a primary means of communication for the widely
spread SUMEX-AIM community. The advent of distributed workstations
is forcing a significant rethinking of the mechanisms employed to
manage such mail. With mainframes, each user tends to receive and
process mail at the computer he used most of the time, his "primary
host". The first inclination of many users when an independent
workstation is placed in front of them is to begin receiving mail at
the workstation, and, in fact, many vendors have implemented
Crispin [Page 1]
RFC 1064 IMAP2 July 1988
facilities to do this. However, this approach has several
disadvantages:
(1) Workstations (especially Lisp workstations) have a software
design that gives full control of all aspects of the system to the
user at the console. As a result, background tasks, like
receiving mail, could well be kept from running for long periods
of time either because the user is asking to use all of the
machine's resources, or because, in the course of working, the
user has (perhaps accidentally) manipulated the environment in
such a way as to prevent mail reception. This could lead to
repeated failed delivery attempts by outside agents.
(2) The hardware failure of a single workstation could keep its
user "off the air" for a considerable time, since repair of
individual workstation units might be delayed. Given the growing
number of workstations spread throughout office environments,
quick repair would not be assured, whereas a centralized mainframe
is generally repaired very soon after failure.
(3) It is more difficult to keep track of mailing addresses when
each person is associated with a distinct machine. Consider the
difficulty in keeping track of a large number of postal addresses
or phone numbers, particularly if there was no single address or
phone number for an organization through which you could reach any
person in that organization. Traditionally, electronic mail on
the ARPANET involved remembering a name and one of several "hosts"
(machines) whose name reflected the organization in which the
individual worked. This was suitable at a time when most
organizations had only one central host. It is less satisfactory
today unless the concept of a host is changed to refer to an
organizational entity and not a particular machine.
(4) It is very difficult to keep a multitude of heterogeneous
workstations working properly with complex mailing protocols,
making it difficult to move forward as progress is made in
electronic communication and as new standards emerge. Each system
has to worry about receiving incoming mail, routing and delivering
outgoing mail, formatting, storing, and providing for the
stability of mailboxes over a variety of possible filing and
mailing protocols.
Consequently, while the workstation may be viewed as an Internet host
in the sense that it implements IP, it should not be viewed as the
entity which contains the user's mailbox. Rather, a mail server
machine (sometimes called a "repository") should hold the mailbox,
and the workstation (hereafter referred to as a "client") should
access the mailbox via mail transactions. Because the mail server
Crispin [Page 2]
RFC 1064 IMAP2 July 1988
machine would be isolated from direct user manipulation, it could
achieve high software reliability easily, and, as a shared resource,
it could achieve high hardware reliability, perhaps through
redundancy. The mail server could be used from arbitrary locations,
allowing users to read mail across campus, town, or country using
more and more commonly available clients. Furthermore, the same user
may access his mailbox from different clients at different times, and
multiple users may access the same mailbox simultaneously.
The mail server acts an an interface among users, data storage, and
other mailers. The mail access protocol is used to retrieve
messages, access and change properties of messages, and manage
mailboxes. This differs from some approaches (e.g., Unix mail via
NFS) in that the mail access protocol is used for all message
manipulations, isolating the user and the client from all knowledge
of how the data storage is used. This means that the mail server can
utilize the data storage in whatever way is most efficient to
organize the mail in that particular environment, without having to
worry about storage representation compatibility across different
machines.
In defining a mail access protocol, it is important to keep in mind
that the client and server form a macrosystem, in which it should be
possible to exploit the strong points of both while compensating for
each other's weaknesses. Furthermore, it's desirable to allow for a
growth path beyond the hoary text-only RFC 822 protocol. Unlike
POP2, IMAP2 has extensive features for remote searching and parsing
of messages on the server. For example, a free text search
(optionally in conjunction with other searching) can be made
throughout the entire mailbox by the server and the results made
available to the client without the client having to transfer the
entire mailbox and searching itself. Since remote parsing of a
message into a structured (and standard format) "envelope" is
available, a client can display envelope information and implement
commands such as REPLY without having any understanding of how to
parse RFC 822, etc. headers.
Additionally, IMAP2 offers several facilities for managing a mailbox
beyond the simple "delete message" functionality of POP2.
In spite of this, IMAP2 is a relatively simple protocol. Although
servers should implement the full set of IMAP2 functions, a simple
client can be written which uses IMAP2 in much the way as a POP2
client.
IMAP2 differs from the DMSP protocol of PCMAIL (RFC 1056) in a more
fundamental manner, reflecting the differing architectures of MM-D
and PCMAIL. PCMAIL is either an online ("interactive mode"), or
Crispin [Page 3]
RFC 1064 IMAP2 July 1988
offline ("batch mode") system. MM-D is primarily an online system in
which real-time and simultaneous mail access were considered
important.
In PCMAIL, there is a long-term client/server relationship in which
some mailbox state is preserved on the client. There is a
registration of clients used by a particular user, and the client
keeps a set of "descriptors" for each message which summarize the
message. The server and client synchronize their states when the
DMSP connection starts up, and, if a client has not accessed the
server for a while, the client does a complete reset (reload) of its
state from the server.
In MM-D, the client/server relationship lasts only for the duration
of the IMAP2 connection. All mailbox state is maintained on the
server. There is no registration of clients. The function of a
descriptor is handled by a structured representation of the message
"envelope". This structure makes it unnecessary for a client to know
anything about RFC 822 parsing. There is no synchronization since
the client does not remember state between IMAP2 connections. This
is not a problem since in general the client never needs the entire
state of the mailbox in a single session, therefore there isn't much
overhead in fetching the state information that is needed as it is
needed.
There are also some functional differences between IMAP2 and DMSP.
DMSP has explicit support for bulletin boards which are only handled
implicitly in IMAP2. DMSP has functions for sending messages,
printing messages, listing mailboxes, and changing passwords, all of
which are done outside of IMAP2. DMSP has 16 binary flags of which 8
are defined by the system. IMAP has flag names; there are currently
5 defined system flag names and a facility for some number (30 in the
current implementations) of user flag names. IMAP2 has a
sophisticated message search facility in the server to identify
interesting messages based on dates, addresses, flag status, or
textual contents without compelling the client to fetch this data for
every message.
It was felt that maintaining state on the client is advantageous only
in those cases where the client is only used by a single user, or if
there is some means on the client to restrict access to another
user's data. It can be a serious disadvantage in an environment in
which multiple users routinely use the same client, the same user
routinely uses different clients, and where there are no access
restrictions on the client. It was also observed that most user mail
access is to a relatively small set of "interesting" messages, which
were either "new" mail or mail based upon some user-selected
criteria. Consequently, IMAP2 was designed to easily identify those
Crispin [Page 4]
RFC 1064 IMAP2 July 1988
"interesting" messages so that the client could fetch the state of
those messages and not those that were not "interesting".
The Protocol
The IMAP2 protocol consists of a sequence of client commands and
server responses, with server data interspersed between the
responses. Unlike most Internet protocols, commands and responses
are tagged. That is, a command begins with a unique identifier
(typically a short alphanumeric sequence such as a Lisp "gensym"
function would generate e.g., A0001, A0002, etc.), called a tag. The
response to this command is given the same tag from the server.
Additionally, the server may send an arbitrary amount of "unsolicited
data", which is identified by the special reserved tag of "*". There
is another special reserved tag, "+", discussed below.
The server must be listening for a connection. When a connection is
opened the server sends an unsolicited OK response as a greeting
message and then waits for commands. When commands are received the
server acts on them and responds with responses, often interspersed
with data.
The client opens a connection, waits for the greeting, then sends a
LOGIN command with user name and password arguments to establish
authorization. Following an OK response from the server, the client
then sends a SELECT command to access the desired mailbox. The
user's default mailbox has a special reserved name of "INBOX" which
is independent of the operating system that the server is implemented
on. The server will generally send a list of valid flags, number of
messages, and number of messages arrived since last access for this
mailbox as unsolicited data, followed by an OK response. The client
may terminate access to this mailbox and access a different one with
another SELECT command.
The client reads mailbox information by means of FETCH commands. The
actual data is transmitted via the unsolicited data mechanism (that
is, FETCH should be viewed as poking the server to include the
desired data along with any other data it wishes to transmit to the
client). There are three major categories of data which may be
fetched.
The first category is that data which is associated with a message as
an entity in the mailbox. There are presently three such items of
data: the "internal date", the "RFC 822 size", and the "flags". The
internal date is the date and time that the message was placed in the
mailbox. The RFC 822 size is subject to deletion in the future; it
is the size in bytes of the message, expressed as an RFC 822 text
string. Current clients only use it as part of a status display
Crispin [Page 5]
RFC 1064 IMAP2 July 1988
line. The flags are a list of status flags associated with the
message (see below). All of the first category data can be fetched
by using the macro-fetch word "FAST"; that is, "FAST" expands to
"(FLAGS INTERNALDATE RFC822.SIZE)".
The second category is that data which describes the composition and
delivery information of a message; that is, information such as the
message sender, recipient lists, message-ID, subject, etc. This is
the information which is stored in the message header in RFC 822
format message and is traditionally called the "envelope". [Note:
this should not be confused with the SMTP (RFC 821) envelope, which
is strictly limited to delivery information.] IMAP2 defines a
structured and unambiguous representation for the envelope which is
particularly nice for Lisp-based parsers. A client can use the
envelope for operations such as replying and not worry about RFC 822
at all. Envelopes are discussed in more detail below. The first and
second category data can be fetched together by using the macro-fetch
word "ALL"; that is, "ALL" expands to "(FLAGS INTERNALDATE
RFC822.SIZE ENVELOPE)".
The third category is that data which is intended for direct human
viewing. The present RFC 822 based IMAP2 defines three such items:
RFC822.HEADER, RFC822.TEXT, and RFC822 (the latter being the two
former appended together in a single text string). Fetching "RFC822"
is equivalent to typing the RFC 822 representation of the message as
stored on the mailbox without any filtering or processing.
Typically, a client will "FETCH ALL" for some or all of the messages
in the mailbox for use as a presentation menu, and when the user
wishes to read a particular message will "FETCH RFC822.TEXT" to get
the message body. A more primitive client could, of course, simply
"FETCH RFC822" a la POP2-type functionality.
The client can alter certain data (presently only the flags) by means
of a STORE command. As an example, a message is deleted from a
mailbox by a STORE command which includes the \DELETED flag as one of
the flags being set.
Other client operations include copying a message to another mailbox
(COPY command), permanently removing deleted messages (EXPUNGE
command), checking for new messages (CHECK command), and searching
for messages which match certain criteria (SEARCH command).
The client terminates the session with the LOGOUT command. The
server returns a "BYE" followed by an "OK".
Crispin [Page 6]
RFC 1064 IMAP2 July 1988
A Typical Scenario
Client Server
------ ------
{Wait for Connection}
{Open Connection} -->
<-- * OK IMAP2 Server Ready
{Wait for command}
A001 LOGIN Fred Secret -->
<-- A001 OK User Fred logged in
{Wait for command}
A002 SELECT INBOX -->
<-- * FLAGS (Meeting Notice \Answered
\Flagged \Deleted \Seen)
<-- * 19 EXISTS
<-- * 2 RECENT
<-- A0002 OK Select complete
{Wait for command}
A003 FETCH 1:19 ALL -->
<-- * 1 Fetch (......)
...
<-- * 18 Fetch (......)
<-- * 19 Fetch (......)
⌨️ 快捷键说明
复制代码Ctrl + C
搜索代码Ctrl + F
全屏模式F11
增大字号Ctrl + =
减小字号Ctrl + -
显示快捷键?