Re: [Dovecot] Issues with VANISHED CHANGEDSINCE

Quoting Michael M Slusarz slusarz@curecanti.org:

I see your point, but the problem is that is not intuitive when
reading the RFC. One part of the RFC defines the behavior of
VANISHED (EARLIER) as only returning changes since the mod-sequence
given. And you are correct that another part of the RFC says that,
essentially, a server is allowed to break this required response.

I'm thinking that this is more of an issue with the way the RFC is
written. I'll move this over to the imap protocol list to get
further input.

Sigh. Never mind. For some reason, I completely ignored (missed?)
this part of the RFC:

Note: A server that receives a mod-sequence smaller than <minmodseq>,
where <minmodseq> is the value of the smallest expunged mod-sequence
it remembers minus one, MUST behave as if it was requested to report
all expunged messages from the provided UID set parameter.

So you are right, I was wrong, and the world is good.

michael