[Dovecot] Testing IMAP clients with Dovecot, problems with MacMail

Rick Romero rick at havokmon.com
Fri May 4 03:10:59 EEST 2007

On May 3, 2007, at 6:08 PM, Bill Cole wrote:

> At 4:13 PM -0400 5/3/07, Stewart Dean wrote:
>> I've been testing my user community's IMAP clients when I try to  
>> login and then transfer a big message from the inbox into a folder  
>> in an overquota folder directory.  I am using native filesystem  
>> quotaing in AIXV5.3 with UWIMAP and comparing my results with what  
>> I see with Dovecot 1.0.0. (My Dovecot built without any plugins or  
>> quota extensions)
>> Everything matches/works except for Mac Mail under SSL with Dovecot..
>> Mac Mail:
>> 1) with UWIMAP, login and mailbox load goes OK, then the illegal  
>> overquota xfer fails (as it should) with a popup reading 'Message  
>> could not be moved', with (port 993) and without (port 143) SSL
>> 2) with Dovecot,
>> 1) login and mailbox load goes OK to port 10143, plain listen, and  
>> the illegal xfer correctly fails as it should with a popup messge  
>> under a plain connection, but
>> 2) When the port number is set to the Dovecot ssl_listen port and  
>> the SSL box is checked, Mac Mail doesn't bring up the inbox and  
>> folders...it acts like it can't connect.
>> Has anyone else seen this behavior, and is there a fix?  Mac Mail  
>> is also known as Mail.app.  I am testing it at 1.3.11 and 2.1.1.   
>> In the July '05 archive, I found this:
>>> It looks like Mail.app treats "non-standard" ports differently.   
>>> On the
>>> standard port (993), the "SSL" option seems to do pure SSL; but  
>>> with another
>>> port specified, it does clean-plus-starttls (and hence fails  
>>> horribly, because
>>> it's talking to a pure SSl service)
>> Is there anything I can do to get MacMail to behave correctly?  Or  
>> will it clear up when I shut down UWIMAP and give Dovecot the  
>> default ports.  A Bronx cheer for Mac Mail........
> I don't think there's any way to get Mail to talk  "imaps" on any  
> port other than 993. I also can't see any compelling reason to to  
> do that, since it looks like all of the clients you tested should  
> be able to use STARTTLS anyway, so having a second port for direct  
> SSL is not useful.
> What am I missing?

Evolution doesn't have a 'port' field, but if you specify host.com: 
587, it'll use port 587.
Maybe Mail.App is the same.

I know using aliases in Mail.App wasn't very obvious..


> -- 
> Bill Cole                                  bill at scconsult.com

More information about the dovecot mailing list