Re: [RFC] pop3: support `?limit=$NUM' parameter in mailbox name

[Konstantin Ryabitsev <konstantin@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Mon, Sep 18, 2023 at 09:14:22PM +0000, Eric Wong wrote:
> > Oh, I did notice what is probably unintentional behaviour -- passing
> > ?limit=XXX affects all mailbox access, not just the initial retrieval.
> > 
> > E.g. if I configured pop3 with ?limit=128, then leave for the weekend and
> > return on Monday, I will only be able to retrieve 128 new messages, regardless
> > of how many arrived over the weekend.
> > 
> > I'm not sure if this is what was intended -- I think it makes more sense to
> > have ?limit=XXX only affect the initial retrieval. In all other cases, when a
> > tracking uuid cookie is present, it should return all messages regardless of
> > ?limit=.
> > 
> > Does that make sense?
> 
> I think there should be an initial_limit parameter in addition to the
> current limit.   initial_limit would be more suited for cronjobs and
> such running on 24/7 systems.  The regular limit would be better
> for systems with intermittent access and could go weeks w/o being
> online (including situations where somebody restored a system from
> a months/years-old backup).

I'm game with that. Maybe even shorten that to l= and il=? I'm still worried
about the field size limit a bit.

> Not feeling well, will try to work on it once (or if) I feel better.

Please take care!

-K