Multiple private namespace question

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Multiple private namespace question

Troy Engel
(apologies if this has been covered, can't find it on the Wiki/FAQ, etc.)

We have a stellar, fantastic, hard working Dovecot 1.0.5 (yes, I need to
upgrade) installation running in Courier-IMAP compatibility mode:

   mail_location = maildir:~/Maildir:INDEX=/var/spool/dovecot/indexes/%1u/%u

   namespace private {
     separator = .
     prefix = INBOX.
     inbox = yes
   }

A user purchased a Windows Mobile 6 device which is ignoring the
namespace (it's the device's bug for sure, other people report it on
forums around the 'net) and there's no way on this device to manually
set the Prefix; so, his Sent mails are never making it back to the
server when replying from the device because of the missing INBOX. issue.

Can I add a second hidden namespace with no prefix:

   namespace private {
     separator = .
     prefix =
     hidden = yes
   }

...to fix his problem, but without adversely affecting anyone else? The
issue that has given me pause is this comment in the config file:

   "Default namespace is simply done by having a namespace with empty
prefix."

..but then there's also:

   "If namespace is hidden, it's not advertised to clients via NAMESPACE
extension or shown in LIST replies."

I'm not sure what exactly will happen by adding a hidden namespace with
no prefix after an advertised namespace with a prefix; this is a live
server, so mucking up the works with a bad config is not an option. :)

Anyone have a clue if this is valid/good/correct and Dovecot will play
nicely?

Many thanks,
-te

--
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid, Inc | http://www.fluid.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Charles Marcus
On 5/23/2008, Troy Engel ([hidden email]) wrote:
> Can I add a second hidden namespace with no prefix:

Certainly...

http://wiki.dovecot.org/Namespaces

--

Best regards,

Charles
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Troy Engel
Charles Marcus wrote:
> On 5/23/2008, Troy Engel ([hidden email]) wrote:
>> Can I add a second hidden namespace with no prefix:
>
> Certainly...
>
> http://wiki.dovecot.org/Namespaces

See, the wiki page has it backwards though of the way I need to do it;
the empty prefix namespace is the inbox = yes, not the hidden = yes. I'm
giving pause because I can't find examples of anyone doing it the other
way around; empty prefix, hidden = yes as NOT the default namespace
(inbox = yes).

Have you run the reverse configuration like I need and can confirm it works?

thx,
-te

--
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid, Inc | http://www.fluid.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Charles Marcus
On 5/23/2008, Troy Engel ([hidden email]) wrote:
>>> Can I add a second hidden namespace with no prefix:

>> Certainly...
>>
>> http://wiki.dovecot.org/Namespaces

> See, the wiki page has it backwards though of the way I need to do it; the empty prefix namespace is the inbox = yes, not the hidden = yes. I'm giving pause because I can't find examples of anyone doing it the other way around; empty prefix, hidden = yes as NOT the default namespace (inbox = yes).
>
> Have you run the reverse configuration like I need and can confirm it works?

No, but there's no reason it wouldn't... a namespace is a namespace.

Easiest is to just try it...

--

Best regards,

Charles
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Troy Engel
Charles Marcus wrote:
>
> No, but there's no reason it wouldn't... a namespace is a namespace.
>
> Easiest is to just try it...

...I think you missed the whole part of my original email that stated
this is a live, hard working server and "just trying things" is not an
option. I'm normally a just-push-the-button type of guy, but in this
case I need to get quantified evidence that it will actually do what I
need without breaking other things.

-te

--
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid, Inc | http://www.fluid.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Charles Marcus
On 5/23/2008, Troy Engel ([hidden email]) wrote:
> ...I think you missed the whole part of my original email that stated
> this is a live, hard working server and "just trying things" is not
> an option. I'm normally a just-push-the-button type of guy, but in
> this case I need to get quantified evidence that it will actually do
> what I need without breaking other things.

No such thing as a guarantee. Only you know your environment, and only
you can properly test such a change.

That said - the examples in the wiki are just that... *examples*.

There is absolutely ZERO reason I can see that it would NOT work. This
isn't in the category of 'just trying things'... it really should just work.

I guess the closest thing to a guarantee you might get is if Timo chimes
in and also says that it will work... so I'll shut up now.

--

Best regards,

Charles
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Timo Sirainen
In reply to this post by Troy Engel
On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 11:35 -0700, Troy Engel wrote:

> Charles Marcus wrote:
> > On 5/23/2008, Troy Engel ([hidden email]) wrote:
> >> Can I add a second hidden namespace with no prefix:
> >
> > Certainly...
> >
> > http://wiki.dovecot.org/Namespaces
>
> See, the wiki page has it backwards though of the way I need to do it;
> the empty prefix namespace is the inbox = yes, not the hidden = yes. I'm
> giving pause because I can't find examples of anyone doing it the other
> way around; empty prefix, hidden = yes as NOT the default namespace
> (inbox = yes).
You can't really hide the empty namespace, because you want all clients
to be able to list root mailboxes. But with some clients you'd want the
LIST reply to list only INBOX (which has children) and with others you'd
want it to list all mailboxes and INBOX without children. There's no way
Dovecot could know which one the client wants.

But I don't think there are any problems if you make INBOX. namespace
the hidden one. Most clients don't care about namespaces.


signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Troy Engel
Timo Sirainen wrote:
>
> But I don't think there are any problems if you make INBOX. namespace
> the hidden one. Most clients don't care about namespaces.

Hi Timo, thanks for the reply - I understand what you're saying. Can you
theorize what will happen to the already configured/subscribed users
(Thunderbird) whose tree looks like:

   INBOX
     |_ Sent
     |_ Drafts

...when I would change the default namespace around and make the empty
prefix inbox=yes? Would everything suddenly become "flat" on them and
cause confusion? Ala:

   INBOX
   Sent
   Drafts

Most Thunderbird instances already configured say "INBOX." under the
setting of '(IMAP Account) -> Server Settings -> Advanced -> Personal
Namespace'; I think this value is filled in automatically by Thunderbird
the first time you configure the account and it queries the server and
received the namespace advertisement.

Would it be correct to assume that all these existing users would be
fine (because of the hidden INBOX prefix namespace, compatibility mode),
and only new users would see a flat hierarchy when setting up Thunderbird?

Many thanks,
-te

--
Troy Engel | Systems Engineer
Fluid Inc. | http://www.fluid.com
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Multiple private namespace question

Timo Sirainen
On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 13:33 -0700, Troy Engel wrote:

> Timo Sirainen wrote:
> >
> > But I don't think there are any problems if you make INBOX. namespace
> > the hidden one. Most clients don't care about namespaces.
>
> Hi Timo, thanks for the reply - I understand what you're saying. Can you
> theorize what will happen to the already configured/subscribed users
> (Thunderbird) whose tree looks like:
>
>    INBOX
>      |_ Sent
>      |_ Drafts
>
> ...when I would change the default namespace around and make the empty
> prefix inbox=yes?
The INBOX should point to the same location with both namespaces, so it
doesn't matter which one has inbox=yes.

> Would everything suddenly become "flat" on them and
> cause confusion? Ala:
>
>    INBOX
>    Sent
>    Drafts

Isn't this how it already is if the INBOX. prefix is set? I thought
mailboxes are shown under INBOX only if there was no prefix.

> Would it be correct to assume that all these existing users would be
> fine (because of the hidden INBOX prefix namespace, compatibility mode),
> and only new users would see a flat hierarchy when setting up Thunderbird?

I'm not really an TB expert..

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment