Re: UIDL Question

Hi Ned/Kelly,

 

Thanks for the info.

 

I will throw the ball back into the vendors court as it seem that it is their problem and not mine :)

 

Sheryl

----- Original Message -----
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed-F5mQmnvYeUWIwRZHo2/mJg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 12:46 am
Subject: Re: [Info-iMS] UIDL Question
To: Kelly Caudill <Kelly.Caudill-UdXhSnd/wVw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Cc: sheryl.bruggy-CK+cXun/dNAQrrorzV6ljw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Info-iMS-QMRIvgJGioDQT0dZR+AlfA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> > sheryl.bruggy-CK+cXun/dNAQrrorzV6ljw@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I have received a complaint from a vendor who supplies our
> organisation with a CRM product.  It seems that when the
> CRM application downloads messages via POP, it sees the UIDL for
> these all these messages as being the same.
>
> > They don't look "all the same" to me.  Perhaps the vendor
> has a bug in how they
> > parse the value?
>
> > > I did a test by telneting to our server and saw the
> following results:
> > >
> > > UIDL
> > > +OK unique-id listing follows
> > > 1 2579-1189132072
> > > 2 2580-1189132072
> > > 3 2581-1189132072
> > > 4 2582-1189132072
> > > 5 2583-1189132072
> > > 6 2584-1189132072
> > > 7 2585-1189132072
> > > 8 2586-1189132072
> > > 9 2587-1189132072
> > > 10 2588-1189132072
> > >
> > >
> > > A quick search of the docs only revealed the following:
> > > "The UIDL implementation is based on IMAP4 Universal Identifiers."
> > >
> > > Does anyone know how the IDs are generated?
>
> > It looks like the IMAP UID of the message (with also happens
> to be the .msg file
> > number) and the IMAP UID VALIDITY of the folder (which happens
> to be the unix
> > time when the folder was created).
>
> That's what our POP3 UIDs look like. More generally, POP3 UIDs
> are allowed to
> be almost any string as long as the string is unique across the
> server. This is
> quite unlike IMAP4 UIDs, which are integers in a strictly
> ascending sequence
> from first message to last.
>
> Any POP3 client has to deal with the full generality that the
> specificationsallow for these things or it is incompliant. And
> since there are
> implementations out there that use hash values and not nubers,
> ours is hardly
> one of the more difficult ones to deal with.
>
>                          Ned
>

Sheryl Bruggy 
Systems/Network Administrator 
Southern Cross University 
._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._