summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/doc/rfc/rfc2221.txt
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
Diffstat (limited to 'doc/rfc/rfc2221.txt')
-rw-r--r--doc/rfc/rfc2221.txt283
1 files changed, 283 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/doc/rfc/rfc2221.txt b/doc/rfc/rfc2221.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..81d0062
--- /dev/null
+++ b/doc/rfc/rfc2221.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,283 @@
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Network Working Group M. Gahrns
+Request for Comments: 2221 Microsoft
+Category: Standards Track October 1997
+
+
+ IMAP4 Login Referrals
+
+Status of this Memo
+
+ This document specifies an Internet standards track protocol for the
+ Internet community, and requests discussion and suggestions for
+ improvements. Please refer to the current edition of the "Internet
+ Official Protocol Standards" (STD 1) for the standardization state
+ and status of this protocol. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
+
+Copyright Notice
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1997). All Rights Reserved.
+
+1. Abstract
+
+ When dealing with large amounts of users and many IMAP4 [RFC-2060]
+ servers, it is often necessary to move users from one IMAP4 server to
+ another. For example, hardware failures or organizational changes
+ may dictate such a move.
+
+ Login referrals allow clients to transparently connect to an
+ alternate IMAP4 server, if their home IMAP4 server has changed.
+
+ A referral mechanism can provide efficiencies over the alternative
+ 'proxy method', in which the local IMAP4 server contacts the remote
+ server on behalf of the client, and then transfers the data from the
+ remote server to itself, and then on to the client. The referral
+ mechanism's direct client connection to the remote server is often a
+ more efficient use of bandwidth, and does not require the local
+ server to impersonate the client when authenticating to the remote
+ server.
+
+2. Conventions used in this document
+
+ In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
+ server respectively.
+
+ A home server, is an IMAP4 server that contains the user's inbox.
+
+ A remote server is a server that contains remote mailboxes.
+
+
+
+
+
+Gahrns Standards Track [Page 1]
+
+RFC 2221 IMAP4 Login Referrals October 1997
+
+
+ The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
+ "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
+ document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC-2119].
+
+3. Introduction and Overview
+
+ IMAP4 servers that support this extension MUST list the keyword
+ LOGIN-REFERRALS in their CAPABILITY response. No client action is
+ needed to invoke the LOGIN-REFERRALS capability in a server.
+
+ A LOGIN-REFERRALS capable IMAP4 server SHOULD NOT return a referral
+ to a server that will return a referral. A client MUST NOT follow
+ more than 10 levels of referral without consulting the user.
+
+ A LOGIN-REFERRALS response code MUST contain as an argument a valid
+ IMAP server URL as defined in [IMAP-URL].
+
+ A home server referral consists of either a tagged NO or OK, or an
+ untagged BYE response that contains a LOGIN-REFERRALS response code.
+
+ Example: A001 NO [REFERRAL IMAP://user;AUTH=*@SERVER2/] Remote Server
+
+ NOTE: user;AUTH=* is specified as required by [IMAP-URL] to avoid a
+ client falling back to anonymous login.
+
+4. Home Server Referrals
+
+ A home server referral may be returned in response to an AUTHENTICATE
+ or LOGIN command, or it may appear in the connection startup banner.
+ If a server returns a home server referral in a tagged NO response,
+ that server does not contain any mailboxes that are accessible to the
+ user. If a server returns a home server referral in a tagged OK
+ response, it indicates that the user's personal mailboxes are
+ elsewhere, but the server contains public mailboxes which are
+ readable by the user. After receiving a home server referral, the
+ client can not make any assumptions as to whether this was a
+ permanent or temporary move of the user.
+
+4.1. LOGIN and AUTHENTICATE Referrals
+
+ An IMAP4 server MAY respond to a LOGIN or AUTHENTICATE command with a
+ home server referral if it wishes to direct the user to another IMAP4
+ server.
+
+ Example: C: A001 LOGIN MIKE PASSWORD
+ S: A001 NO [REFERRAL IMAP://MIKE@SERVER2/] Specified user
+ is invalid on this server. Try SERVER2.
+
+
+
+
+Gahrns Standards Track [Page 2]
+
+RFC 2221 IMAP4 Login Referrals October 1997
+
+
+ Example: C: A001 LOGIN MATTHEW PASSWORD
+ S: A001 OK [REFERRAL IMAP://MATTHEW@SERVER2/] Specified
+ user's personal mailboxes located on Server2, but
+ public mailboxes are available.
+
+ Example: C: A001 AUTHENTICATE GSSAPI
+ <authentication exchange>
+ S: A001 NO [REFERRAL IMAP://user;AUTH=GSSAPI@SERVER2/]
+ Specified user is invalid on this server. Try
+ SERVER2.
+
+4.2. BYE at connection startup referral
+
+ An IMAP4 server MAY respond with an untagged BYE and a REFERRAL
+ response code that contains an IMAP URL to a home server if it is not
+ willing to accept connections and wishes to direct the client to
+ another IMAP4 server.
+
+ Example: S: * BYE [REFERRAL IMAP://user;AUTH=*@SERVER2/] Server not
+ accepting connections. Try SERVER2
+
+5. Formal Syntax
+
+ The following syntax specification uses the augmented Backus-Naur
+ Form (BNF) as described in [ABNF].
+
+ This amends the "resp_text_code" element of the IMAP4 grammar
+ described in [RFC-2060]
+
+ resp_text_code =/ "REFERRAL" SPACE <imapurl>
+ ; See [IMAP-URL] for definition of <imapurl>
+ ; See [RFC-2060] for base definition of resp_text_code
+
+6. Security Considerations
+
+ The IMAP4 login referral mechanism makes use of IMAP URLs, and as
+ such, have the same security considerations as general internet URLs
+ [RFC-1738], and in particular IMAP URLs [IMAP-URL].
+
+ A server MUST NOT give a login referral if authentication for that
+ user fails. This is to avoid revealing information about the user's
+ account to an unauthorized user.
+
+ With the LOGIN-REFERRALS capability, it is potentially easier to
+ write a rogue 'password catching' server that collects login data and
+ then refers the client to their actual IMAP4 server. Although
+ referrals reduce the effort to write such a server, the referral
+ response makes detection of the intrusion easier.
+
+
+
+Gahrns Standards Track [Page 3]
+
+RFC 2221 IMAP4 Login Referrals October 1997
+
+
+7. References
+
+ [RFC-2060], Crispin, M., "Internet Message Access Protocol - Version
+ 4rev1", RFC 2060, December 1996.
+
+ [IMAP-URL], Newman, C., "IMAP URL Scheme", RFC 2192, Innosoft,
+ September 1997.
+
+ [RFC-1738], Berners-Lee, T., Masinter, L. and M. McCahill, "Uniform
+ Resource Locators (URL)", RFC 1738, December 1994.
+
+ [RFC-2119], Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
+ Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.
+
+ [ABNF], DRUMS working group, Dave Crocker Editor, "Augmented BNF for
+ Syntax Specifications: ABNF", Work in Progress.
+
+8. Acknowledgments
+
+ Many valuable suggestions were received from private discussions and
+ the IMAP4 mailing list. In particular, Raymond Cheng, Mark Crispin,
+ Mark Keasling Chris Newman and Larry Osterman made significant
+ contributions to this document.
+
+9. Author's Address
+
+ Mike Gahrns
+ Microsoft
+ One Microsoft Way
+ Redmond, WA, 98072
+
+ Phone: (206) 936-9833
+ EMail: mikega@microsoft.com
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Gahrns Standards Track [Page 4]
+
+RFC 2221 IMAP4 Login Referrals October 1997
+
+
+10. Full Copyright Statement
+
+ Copyright (C) The Internet Society (1997). All Rights Reserved.
+
+ This document and translations of it may be copied and furnished to
+ others, and derivative works that comment on or otherwise explain it
+ or assist in its implmentation may be prepared, copied, published
+ andand distributed, in whole or in part, without restriction of any
+ kind, provided that the above copyright notice and this paragraph are
+ included on all such copies and derivative works. However, this
+ document itself may not be modified in any way, such as by removing
+ the copyright notice or references to the Internet Society or other
+ Internet organizations, except as needed for the purpose of
+ developing Internet standards in which case the procedures for
+ copyrights defined in the Internet Standards process must be
+ followed, or as required to translate it into languages other than
+ English.
+
+ The limited permissions granted above are perpetual and will not be
+ revoked by the Internet Society or its successors or assigns.
+
+ This document and the information contained herein is provided on an
+ "AS IS" basis and THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING
+ TASK FORCE DISCLAIMS ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING
+ BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION
+ HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF
+ MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE."
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+Gahrns Standards Track [Page 5]
+