[Dovecot] IMAP IDLE - iPhone?

[dovecot]

Hi All,

Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

Has anyone successfully deployed this? If yes, did you have to use an
app from the Apple store? For me the IMAP process works, however it's
clearly not notifying the client when new email is detected on the
server.

cya

Craig

[Timo Sirainen]

Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..

[Michael Stilkerich]

Hi,

Post by Timo Sirainen
Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..

the Apple push service for Mail.app uses the same push notification
service as all other
push notifications for iOS (APNS, Apple Push Notification Service). The
Device retains a
persistent connection to Apple's APNS Gateway.

To transmit a push notification via APNS, the sender needs a certificate
issued by Apple
for the receiving application (Mail.app in this case). One can get such
a certificate by
purchasing Lion Server, which includes such a certificate (I presume
Mountain Lion
Server does as well).

The Lion Server uses dovecot, and Apple's patch for the
XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE extension
is available on
http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/dovecot/dovecot-239/dovecot/src/plugins/push-notify/

It basically works as following:

1) Dovecot advertises the XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE Capability
2) When the device logs in to the IMAP server and sees that it supports
this capability, it registers with the server for push notifications and
provides its device id and the id of the corresponding mail account on
the device. These two ids are required to route a push notification to
the device.
3) The server records all registered devices for an account. Upon an
incoming mail for the account, it transmits a push notification.
4) The device does not directly unregister; this is done using the
feedback mechanism of APNS, which tells a service provider that a device
does not wish to receive push notifications any longer.

The actual transmission of the push notifications to the APNS server is
not part of the dovecot patch
but a separate program. One can use the Net::APNS perl module (found on
cpan) to fairly easily
replicate that program. Apple's original is also available:

http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/dovecot/dovecot-239/dovecot.push-notify/daemon

-Mike

P.S.: I'm not sure if one is allowed to do this, though.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4493 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/e64bc1b3/attachment.bin>

[Michael Stilkerich]

Hi,

Post by Timo Sirainen
Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..

the Apple push service for Mail.app uses the same push notification
service as all other
push notifications for iOS (APNS, Apple Push Notification Service). The
Device retains a
persistent connection to Apple's APNS Gateway.

To transmit a push notification via APNS, the sender needs a certificate
issued by Apple
for the receiving application (Mail.app in this case). One can get such
a certificate by
purchasing Lion Server, which includes such a certificate (I presume
Mountain Lion
Server does as well).

The Lion Server uses dovecot, and Apple's patch for the
XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE extension
is available on
http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/dovecot/dovecot-239/dovecot/src/plugins/push-notify/

It basically works as following:

1) Dovecot advertises the XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE Capability
2) When the device logs in to the IMAP server and sees that it supports
this capability, it registers with the server for push notifications and
provides its device id and the id of the corresponding mail account on
the device. These two ids are required to route a push notification to
the device.
3) The server records all registered devices for an account. Upon an
incoming mail for the account, it transmits a push notification.
4) The device does not directly unregister; this is done using the
feedback mechanism of APNS, which tells a service provider that a device
does not wish to receive push notifications any longer.

The actual transmission of the push notifications to the APNS server is
not part of the dovecot patch
but a separate program. One can use the Net::APNS perl module (found on
cpan) to fairly easily
replicate that program. Apple's original is also available:

http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/dovecot/dovecot-239/dovecot.push-notify/daemon

-Mike

P.S.: I'm not sure if one is allowed to do this, though.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4493 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/e64bc1b3/attachment-0002.bin>

[Michael Stilkerich]

Hi,

Post by Timo Sirainen
Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..

the Apple push service for Mail.app uses the same push notification
service as all other
push notifications for iOS (APNS, Apple Push Notification Service). The
Device retains a
persistent connection to Apple's APNS Gateway.

To transmit a push notification via APNS, the sender needs a certificate
issued by Apple
for the receiving application (Mail.app in this case). One can get such
a certificate by
purchasing Lion Server, which includes such a certificate (I presume
Mountain Lion
Server does as well).

The Lion Server uses dovecot, and Apple's patch for the
XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE extension
is available on
http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/dovecot/dovecot-239/dovecot/src/plugins/push-notify/

It basically works as following:

1) Dovecot advertises the XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE Capability
2) When the device logs in to the IMAP server and sees that it supports
this capability, it registers with the server for push notifications and
provides its device id and the id of the corresponding mail account on
the device. These two ids are required to route a push notification to
the device.
3) The server records all registered devices for an account. Upon an
incoming mail for the account, it transmits a push notification.
4) The device does not directly unregister; this is done using the
feedback mechanism of APNS, which tells a service provider that a device
does not wish to receive push notifications any longer.

The actual transmission of the push notifications to the APNS server is
not part of the dovecot patch
but a separate program. One can use the Net::APNS perl module (found on
cpan) to fairly easily
replicate that program. Apple's original is also available:

http://www.opensource.apple.com/source/dovecot/dovecot-239/dovecot.push-notify/daemon

-Mike

P.S.: I'm not sure if one is allowed to do this, though.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4493 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/e64bc1b3/attachment-0004.bin>

[Luigi Rosa]

Post by dovecot
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove it and
go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.





Ciao,
luigi

[Robin]

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.

It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.

=R=

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Robin

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.

It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.

Dovecot has by default:

imap_idle_notify_interval = 2 mins

So the phone needs to receive and send data every 2 minutes. Increasing this / disabling it entirely should help with power usage. But even then active TCP connections do eat up battery.

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Robin

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.

It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.

Dovecot has by default:

imap_idle_notify_interval = 2 mins

So the phone needs to receive and send data every 2 minutes. Increasing this / disabling it entirely should help with power usage. But even then active TCP connections do eat up battery.

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Robin

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.

It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.

Dovecot has by default:

imap_idle_notify_interval = 2 mins

So the phone needs to receive and send data every 2 minutes. Increasing this / disabling it entirely should help with power usage. But even then active TCP connections do eat up battery.

[Robert Schetterer]

Post by Luigi Rosa

Post by dovecot
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

so simply do it

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.
Ciao,
luigi

imap idle is often promoted as push mail
but tec side it isnt "exactly" the same, in users eyes the result looks
nearly equal

yes every service which let stay you online, robs power from battery
but you can sync only manuall etc ( for sure then push makes no sense
anymore )

however its a human related question, if i need mails always and
everywhere and in "real time"

in my eyes , if its really urgent people should phone together *g

[Robin]

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.

It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.

=R=

[Robert Schetterer]

Post by Luigi Rosa

Post by dovecot
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

so simply do it

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.
Ciao,
luigi

imap idle is often promoted as push mail
but tec side it isnt "exactly" the same, in users eyes the result looks
nearly equal

yes every service which let stay you online, robs power from battery
but you can sync only manuall etc ( for sure then push makes no sense
anymore )

however its a human related question, if i need mails always and
everywhere and in "real time"

in my eyes , if its really urgent people should phone together *g

[Robin]

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.

It sounds like "push" was really implemented as a poll.

=R=

[Robert Schetterer]

Post by Luigi Rosa

Post by dovecot
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

so simply do it

Post by Luigi Rosa
I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove
it and go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.
Ciao,
luigi

imap idle is often promoted as push mail
but tec side it isnt "exactly" the same, in users eyes the result looks
nearly equal

yes every service which let stay you online, robs power from battery
but you can sync only manuall etc ( for sure then push makes no sense
anymore )

however its a human related question, if i need mails always and
everywhere and in "real time"

in my eyes , if its really urgent people should phone together *g

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by dovecot
Hi All,
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.
Has anyone successfully deployed this? If yes, did you have to use an
app from the Apple store? For me the IMAP process works, however it's
clearly not notifying the client when new email is detected on the
server.
cya
Craig

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's
IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold
look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use
IMAP server as backend.

Sergey S. Kovalev

[Robert Schetterer]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use
IMAP server as backend.

z-push works nice here with android, also the new horde beta has now
calender, abook, notes, mail sync

[Reindl Harald]

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use IMAP server as backend.

this may be a IPHONE limitation as all the apple
clients are buggy like hell since years

i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/176b4c4d/attachment.bin>

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use IMAP server as backend.

this may be a IPHONE limitation as all the apple
clients are buggy like hell since years
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get
changes. But any of this solution will eat battery very fast,
proportionally to count of folders to check.
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not
implemented in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection.

Sergey S. Kovalev

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get changes.

typically the client opens a connecton for each folder to check

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
But any of this solution will eat battery very fast, proportionally
to count of folders to check.

and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

it's a limitation from Apple because they have not the
knowledge to implement relieable mail-clients see below
the removed posting on apple-support (first paragraphs
german but posting and answer from Apple below in english)

http://www.rhsoft.net/





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/9717a4eb/attachment-0001.bin>

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get changes.

typically the client opens a connecton for each folder to check

Sure, it's better.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
But any of this solution will eat battery very fast, proportionally
to count of folders to check.

and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

This is not an argument. You can have hundred of folders sorted by sieve
and really need to know if there new mail in any of it.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder.

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your
phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices.

Post by Reindl Harald
it's a limitation from Apple because they have not the
knowledge to implement relieable mail-clients see below
the removed posting on apple-support (first paragraphs
german but posting and answer from Apple below in english)
http://www.rhsoft.net/

I'm not fan of apple anyway, so do not interested in this discussion at all.

Sergey S. Kovalev.

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder.

Assuming NOTIFY extension isn't implemented by both. (Dovecot v2.2 hopefully will have it, and K-9 apparently is interested in adding it too after that.)

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

I guess, there is no trick, that will change the linear complexity by
traffic and by CPU usage.
If you can change settings in dovecot - you can set up ActiveSync there.
It's more suitable for mobile mailing.

[Ed W]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

The battery consumption problem seems common, but understanding of it is
poor...

The situation is simply:
- Waking up a 3G radio is expensive on power
- So prefer to do it less frequently and do a chunk of stuff, rather
than doing a small amount of data quite frequently
- Every 30 mins is only 48 times a day. Every 15 seconds is massively more
- Different 3G networks have different parameters set which will
dramatically affect battery life. ie they wait longer/shorter before
allowing the radio to go idle once woken up. I don't know a good online
resource to see these settings, my old Nokia had a utility to
investigate things...
- Firewalls impose challenges on being silent for 30 mins at a time and
may drop any NAT mappings
- The 3G network will almost certainly have a NAT in the way which
guarantees you have a (probably very short) NAT timeout (perhaps 10 mins
or perhaps less)
- Then there is tcp keepalive. Does Dovecot enable these? (Sorry, I
should look in the code...). However, applications which enable it (eg
optional in SSH) will trigger a default (I think) 75 second network packet

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from
checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this
if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address
and per IP ?

But of course if your emails turn up every few seconds, then you will be
triggering wakeups every few seconds also.

I think if you tune things with that in mind, it's very possible to get
very low battery usage. Using tcpdump on your mobile client to help
tune things is a great help. Basically every stray packet is a killer
for battery, hunt them down.


Cheers

Ed W

[Timo Sirainen]

- Then there is tcp keepalive. Does Dovecot enable these? (Sorry, I should look in the code...).

Yes.

However, applications which enable it (eg optional in SSH) will trigger a default (I think) 75 second network packet

It's something like 2 hours by default in Linux.

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address and per IP ?

Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

But of course if your emails turn up every few seconds, then you will be triggering wakeups every few seconds also.

Maybe Dovecot could make this somehow smarter some day.. Or create a plugin that allows that.

[Oon-Ee Ng]

Post by Timo Sirainen
Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

<very-OT>I for one welcome our new Dovecot overlords</very-OT>

Sorry for the noise.

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Timo Sirainen

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address and per IP ?

Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

[Warren Baker]

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

[Daryl Richards]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all

corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since
there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were
more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).
Well, here's a "We use it" if you need it..

It probably just makes sense to block all out all RFC1918 addresses..

- --
Daryl Richards
Isle Technical Services Inc.

[Luigi Rosa]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :)

YES!

I have a big customer (400 PCs) with 172.16.0.0/16 internal network and a
subnet of 192.168.0.0 for DMZ

I use it more than 192.168 when I create networks.



Ciao,
luigi

- --
/
+--[Luigi Rosa]--
\

Walk softly and carry a megawatt laser.

[Warren Baker]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

Yeah as others have mentioned - also not sure whether it is worth the
effort to support IPv6's 'private' network (fc00::/7)?
I havent seen anyone making use of this for their v6 enabled sites but
others may have input here.

thanks

[Jerry]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:10:42 +0200

Post by Warren Baker
Yeah as others have mentioned - also not sure whether it is worth the
effort to support IPv6's 'private' network (fc00::/7)?
I havent seen anyone making use of this for their v6 enabled sites but
others may have input here.

I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

[Matthew Powell]

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.

As I understand it, the intention is to avoid treating connections through a load balancer or proxy as though they're the same client device. The assumption that private address = proxy is a fair default, but some sites will be using public addresses for their proxies. And that's only going to increase with IPv6.

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Matthew Powell

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.
As I understand it, the intention is to avoid treating connections through a
load balancer or proxy as though they're the same client device

i doubt the ip is generally the wrong value to define
something is the same client device, there are millions
of networks behind NAT out there with a lot of clients
usually connecting to the same mailserver via the same
public IP and many of them have a workstation beside
a mobile device using the same IMAP account

the same device = open connection, nothing else

Post by Matthew Powell
The assumption that private address = proxy is a fair default

in my opinion this is generally the wrong direction

i do NOT like it when server software behaves different
from my private LAN where services are tested than later
after making the service public from the WAN

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120824/6cd95a9f/attachment.bin>

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Matthew Powell

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.

The reason for this default exclusion list is exactly to avoid behaving badly in unconfigured systems. Normally people should be using Dovecot proxies and login_trusted_networks setting configured to avoid the problem entirely.

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Matthew Powell

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.
As I understand it, the intention is to avoid treating connections through a
load balancer or proxy as though they're the same client device

i doubt the ip is generally the wrong value to define
something is the same client device, there are millions
of networks behind NAT out there with a lot of clients
usually connecting to the same mailserver via the same
public IP and many of them have a workstation beside
a mobile device using the same IMAP account

the same device = open connection, nothing else

Post by Matthew Powell
The assumption that private address = proxy is a fair default

in my opinion this is generally the wrong direction

i do NOT like it when server software behaves different
from my private LAN where services are tested than later
after making the service public from the WAN

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120824/6cd95a9f/attachment-0002.bin>

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Matthew Powell

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.

The reason for this default exclusion list is exactly to avoid behaving badly in unconfigured systems. Normally people should be using Dovecot proxies and login_trusted_networks setting configured to avoid the problem entirely.

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Matthew Powell

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.
As I understand it, the intention is to avoid treating connections through a
load balancer or proxy as though they're the same client device

i doubt the ip is generally the wrong value to define
something is the same client device, there are millions
of networks behind NAT out there with a lot of clients
usually connecting to the same mailserver via the same
public IP and many of them have a workstation beside
a mobile device using the same IMAP account

the same device = open connection, nothing else

Post by Matthew Powell
The assumption that private address = proxy is a fair default

in my opinion this is generally the wrong direction

i do NOT like it when server software behaves different
from my private LAN where services are tested than later
after making the service public from the WAN

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120824/6cd95a9f/attachment-0004.bin>

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Matthew Powell

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.

The reason for this default exclusion list is exactly to avoid behaving badly in unconfigured systems. Normally people should be using Dovecot proxies and login_trusted_networks setting configured to avoid the problem entirely.

[Matthew Powell]

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.

As I understand it, the intention is to avoid treating connections through a load balancer or proxy as though they're the same client device. The assumption that private address = proxy is a fair default, but some sites will be using public addresses for their proxies. And that's only going to increase with IPv6.

[Matthew Powell]

Post by Jerry
I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

I wonder whether it would be better to make the exclusion list configurable.

As I understand it, the intention is to avoid treating connections through a load balancer or proxy as though they're the same client device. The assumption that private address = proxy is a fair default, but some sites will be using public addresses for their proxies. And that's only going to increase with IPv6.

[Jerry]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:10:42 +0200

Post by Warren Baker
Yeah as others have mentioned - also not sure whether it is worth the
effort to support IPv6's 'private' network (fc00::/7)?
I havent seen anyone making use of this for their v6 enabled sites but
others may have input here.

I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

[Jerry]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2012 10:10:42 +0200

Post by Warren Baker
Yeah as others have mentioned - also not sure whether it is worth the
effort to support IPv6's 'private' network (fc00::/7)?
I havent seen anyone making use of this for their v6 enabled sites but
others may have input here.

I would personally recommend supporting it. If history teaches us
anything, it is that sooner or later, and usually sooner, someone will
require that block. Being prepared for it in advance would seem like
the prudent thing to do.

[Giles Coochey]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

I specifically use 172.16.0.0/12 because others don't, I also
specifically don't use 172.16.0.0/16, because if someone does use
172.16.0.0/12 they usually only use 172.16.0.0/16...
It's easy for people to connect to my networks via a VPN connection, and
generally not have any IP conflicts with their own RFC1918 ranges and
not have to fiddle with NAT issues.
--
Regards,

Giles Coochey, CCNA, CCNAS
NetSecSpec Ltd
[phone]
http://www.coochey.net
http://www.netsecspec.co.uk
giles at coochey.net


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4968 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120829/f56aa36f/attachment-0001.bin>

[Daryl Richards]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all

corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since
there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were
more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).
Well, here's a "We use it" if you need it..

It probably just makes sense to block all out all RFC1918 addresses..

- --
Daryl Richards
Isle Technical Services Inc.

[Luigi Rosa]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :)

YES!

I have a big customer (400 PCs) with 172.16.0.0/16 internal network and a
subnet of 192.168.0.0 for DMZ

I use it more than 192.168 when I create networks.



Ciao,
luigi

- --
/
+--[Luigi Rosa]--
\

Walk softly and carry a megawatt laser.

[Warren Baker]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

Yeah as others have mentioned - also not sure whether it is worth the
effort to support IPv6's 'private' network (fc00::/7)?
I havent seen anyone making use of this for their v6 enabled sites but
others may have input here.

thanks

[Giles Coochey]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

I specifically use 172.16.0.0/12 because others don't, I also
specifically don't use 172.16.0.0/16, because if someone does use
172.16.0.0/12 they usually only use 172.16.0.0/16...
It's easy for people to connect to my networks via a VPN connection, and
generally not have any IP conflicts with their own RFC1918 ranges and
not have to fiddle with NAT issues.
--
Regards,

Giles Coochey, CCNA, CCNAS
NetSecSpec Ltd
[phone]
http://www.coochey.net
http://www.netsecspec.co.uk
giles at coochey.net


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4968 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120829/f56aa36f/attachment-0002.bin>

[Daryl Richards]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all

corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since
there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were
more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).
Well, here's a "We use it" if you need it..

It probably just makes sense to block all out all RFC1918 addresses..

- --
Daryl Richards
Isle Technical Services Inc.

[Luigi Rosa]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :)

YES!

I have a big customer (400 PCs) with 172.16.0.0/16 internal network and a
subnet of 192.168.0.0 for DMZ

I use it more than 192.168 when I create networks.



Ciao,
luigi

- --
/
+--[Luigi Rosa]--
\

Walk softly and carry a megawatt laser.

[Warren Baker]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker
Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

Yeah as others have mentioned - also not sure whether it is worth the
effort to support IPv6's 'private' network (fc00::/7)?
I havent seen anyone making use of this for their v6 enabled sites but
others may have input here.

thanks

[Giles Coochey]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

I specifically use 172.16.0.0/12 because others don't, I also
specifically don't use 172.16.0.0/16, because if someone does use
172.16.0.0/12 they usually only use 172.16.0.0/16...
It's easy for people to connect to my networks via a VPN connection, and
generally not have any IP conflicts with their own RFC1918 ranges and
not have to fiddle with NAT issues.
--
Regards,

Giles Coochey, CCNA, CCNAS
NetSecSpec Ltd
[phone]
http://www.coochey.net
http://www.netsecspec.co.uk
giles at coochey.net


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4968 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120829/f56aa36f/attachment-0004.bin>

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Warren Baker

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

Is it actually used? :) I've used 192.168 in my home network and all corporate networks I've seen have been 10/8. But yeah, I guess since there aren't more than those 3 I'll just add it (I thought there were more of them, but looks like they're reserved for other purposes).

[Warren Baker]

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

[Warren Baker]

Post by Timo Sirainen
v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

Is there a reason why 172.16.0.0/12 was left out of the change ^^ ?

[Oon-Ee Ng]

Post by Timo Sirainen
Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

<very-OT>I for one welcome our new Dovecot overlords</very-OT>

Sorry for the noise.

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Timo Sirainen

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address and per IP ?

Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

[Oon-Ee Ng]

Post by Timo Sirainen
Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

<very-OT>I for one welcome our new Dovecot overlords</very-OT>

Sorry for the noise.

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Timo Sirainen

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address and per IP ?

Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

v2.2 has this now: http://hg.dovecot.org/dovecot-2.2/rev/8d7f9e2d726c

[Timo Sirainen]

- Then there is tcp keepalive. Does Dovecot enable these? (Sorry, I should look in the code...).

Yes.

However, applications which enable it (eg optional in SSH) will trigger a default (I think) 75 second network packet

It's something like 2 hours by default in Linux.

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address and per IP ?

Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

But of course if your emails turn up every few seconds, then you will be triggering wakeups every few seconds also.

Maybe Dovecot could make this somehow smarter some day.. Or create a plugin that allows that.

[Timo Sirainen]

- Then there is tcp keepalive. Does Dovecot enable these? (Sorry, I should look in the code...).

Yes.

However, applications which enable it (eg optional in SSH) will trigger a default (I think) 75 second network packet

It's something like 2 hours by default in Linux.

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address and per IP ?

Yes, doesn't help with multiple accounts, because the hashed username is different (no IP). I guess this could be changed to be per IP just as well. I think I wondered about which one to use previously but didn't see any point in choosing IP over username, but yes, multiple accounts could be a reason, especially after the whole world is using only Dovecot. :)

But of course if your emails turn up every few seconds, then you will be triggering wakeups every few seconds also.

Maybe Dovecot could make this somehow smarter some day.. Or create a plugin that allows that.

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

I guess, there is no trick, that will change the linear complexity by
traffic and by CPU usage.
If you can change settings in dovecot - you can set up ActiveSync there.
It's more suitable for mobile mailing.

[Ed W]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

The battery consumption problem seems common, but understanding of it is
poor...

The situation is simply:
- Waking up a 3G radio is expensive on power
- So prefer to do it less frequently and do a chunk of stuff, rather
than doing a small amount of data quite frequently
- Every 30 mins is only 48 times a day. Every 15 seconds is massively more
- Different 3G networks have different parameters set which will
dramatically affect battery life. ie they wait longer/shorter before
allowing the radio to go idle once woken up. I don't know a good online
resource to see these settings, my old Nokia had a utility to
investigate things...
- Firewalls impose challenges on being silent for 30 mins at a time and
may drop any NAT mappings
- The 3G network will almost certainly have a NAT in the way which
guarantees you have a (probably very short) NAT timeout (perhaps 10 mins
or perhaps less)
- Then there is tcp keepalive. Does Dovecot enable these? (Sorry, I
should look in the code...). However, applications which enable it (eg
optional in SSH) will trigger a default (I think) 75 second network packet

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from
checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this
if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address
and per IP ?

But of course if your emails turn up every few seconds, then you will be
triggering wakeups every few seconds also.

I think if you tune things with that in mind, it's very possible to get
very low battery usage. Using tcpdump on your mobile client to help
tune things is a great help. Basically every stray packet is a killer
for battery, hunt them down.


Cheers

Ed W

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

I guess, there is no trick, that will change the linear complexity by
traffic and by CPU usage.
If you can change settings in dovecot - you can set up ActiveSync there.
It's more suitable for mobile mailing.

[Ed W]

Post by Timo Sirainen

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

The battery consumption problem seems common, but understanding of it is
poor...

The situation is simply:
- Waking up a 3G radio is expensive on power
- So prefer to do it less frequently and do a chunk of stuff, rather
than doing a small amount of data quite frequently
- Every 30 mins is only 48 times a day. Every 15 seconds is massively more
- Different 3G networks have different parameters set which will
dramatically affect battery life. ie they wait longer/shorter before
allowing the radio to go idle once woken up. I don't know a good online
resource to see these settings, my old Nokia had a utility to
investigate things...
- Firewalls impose challenges on being silent for 30 mins at a time and
may drop any NAT mappings
- The 3G network will almost certainly have a NAT in the way which
guarantees you have a (probably very short) NAT timeout (perhaps 10 mins
or perhaps less)
- Then there is tcp keepalive. Does Dovecot enable these? (Sorry, I
should look in the code...). However, applications which enable it (eg
optional in SSH) will trigger a default (I think) 75 second network packet

As Timo says, Dovecot tries to be clever and coalesce packets from
checking multiple folders, but from memory there are limitations on this
if you have multiple *accounts*? I think the hash is per email address
and per IP ?

But of course if your emails turn up every few seconds, then you will be
triggering wakeups every few seconds also.

I think if you tune things with that in mind, it's very possible to get
very low battery usage. Using tcpdump on your mobile client to help
tune things is a great help. Basically every stray packet is a killer
for battery, hunt them down.


Cheers

Ed W

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

This is not an argument. You can have hundred of folders sorted by
sieve and really need to know if there new mail
in any of it

surely IT IS an argument

on a non-iPhone you can chosse what is important
your agrumentation is even one argument more against iPhone

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder

as proven by other devices there is no limitation

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices

again: how does it help me if I NEED to check them?

and no, IMAP has no limitations proven by Android-client
my Samsung Galaxy S3 has around 25 push folders

no problem with K9 mail to have them in my "common inbox"
including my own sent messages while on the desktop i
use the folder structure and my battery has a average
lifetime of 1.5 days

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/1148fc33/attachment.bin>

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald
surely IT IS an argument
on a non-iPhone you can chosse what is important
your agrumentation is even one argument more against iPhone

If we now talking about android vs iPhone now... Imagine Android default
email client. It have no many features, that iPhone's default have
(Note: i do not use iPhone, i'm not fan of Apple).
Then return to thing I wanna tell in previous letter - the situation,
when you really NEED to follow ALL of hundred of mail dirs.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder

as proven by other devices there is no limitation

Can't you distinguish the protocol itself with limitation to follow only
one dir and the realization with workaround to create many connections
to follow all required dirs?
Just imagine that ActiveSync have no that limitation - it use only one
connection for any count of mail dirs and therefore it's scalability is
very good!

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices

again: how does it help me if I NEED to check them?

Sure! If you NEED to check them - I guess you can find some app in Apple
Store.

Post by Reindl Harald
and no, IMAP has no limitations proven by Android-client
my Samsung Galaxy S3 has around 25 push folders

Yes, it has. The workaround is something else, that limitation itself.

Post by Reindl Harald
no problem with K9 mail to have them in my "common inbox"
including my own sent messages while on the desktop i
use the folder structure and my battery has a average
lifetime of 1.5 days

Android's power consumption is a result of very many factors. Spherical
1.5 days is something that have no any sense.

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald
surely IT IS an argument
on a non-iPhone you can chosse what is important
your agrumentation is even one argument more against iPhone

If we now talking about android vs iPhone now... Imagine Android default
email client. It have no many features, that iPhone's default have
(Note: i do not use iPhone, i'm not fan of Apple).
Then return to thing I wanna tell in previous letter - the situation,
when you really NEED to follow ALL of hundred of mail dirs.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder

as proven by other devices there is no limitation

Can't you distinguish the protocol itself with limitation to follow only
one dir and the realization with workaround to create many connections
to follow all required dirs?
Just imagine that ActiveSync have no that limitation - it use only one
connection for any count of mail dirs and therefore it's scalability is
very good!

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices

again: how does it help me if I NEED to check them?

Sure! If you NEED to check them - I guess you can find some app in Apple
Store.

Post by Reindl Harald
and no, IMAP has no limitations proven by Android-client
my Samsung Galaxy S3 has around 25 push folders

Yes, it has. The workaround is something else, that limitation itself.

Post by Reindl Harald
no problem with K9 mail to have them in my "common inbox"
including my own sent messages while on the desktop i
use the folder structure and my battery has a average
lifetime of 1.5 days

Android's power consumption is a result of very many factors. Spherical
1.5 days is something that have no any sense.

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald
surely IT IS an argument
on a non-iPhone you can chosse what is important
your agrumentation is even one argument more against iPhone

If we now talking about android vs iPhone now... Imagine Android default
email client. It have no many features, that iPhone's default have
(Note: i do not use iPhone, i'm not fan of Apple).
Then return to thing I wanna tell in previous letter - the situation,
when you really NEED to follow ALL of hundred of mail dirs.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder

as proven by other devices there is no limitation

Can't you distinguish the protocol itself with limitation to follow only
one dir and the realization with workaround to create many connections
to follow all required dirs?
Just imagine that ActiveSync have no that limitation - it use only one
connection for any count of mail dirs and therefore it's scalability is
very good!

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices

again: how does it help me if I NEED to check them?

Sure! If you NEED to check them - I guess you can find some app in Apple
Store.

Post by Reindl Harald
and no, IMAP has no limitations proven by Android-client
my Samsung Galaxy S3 has around 25 push folders

Yes, it has. The workaround is something else, that limitation itself.

Post by Reindl Harald
no problem with K9 mail to have them in my "common inbox"
including my own sent messages while on the desktop i
use the folder structure and my battery has a average
lifetime of 1.5 days

Android's power consumption is a result of very many factors. Spherical
1.5 days is something that have no any sense.

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder.

Assuming NOTIFY extension isn't implemented by both. (Dovecot v2.2 hopefully will have it, and K-9 apparently is interested in adding it too after that.)

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

This is not an argument. You can have hundred of folders sorted by
sieve and really need to know if there new mail
in any of it

surely IT IS an argument

on a non-iPhone you can chosse what is important
your agrumentation is even one argument more against iPhone

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder

as proven by other devices there is no limitation

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices

again: how does it help me if I NEED to check them?

and no, IMAP has no limitations proven by Android-client
my Samsung Galaxy S3 has around 25 push folders

no problem with K9 mail to have them in my "common inbox"
including my own sent messages while on the desktop i
use the folder structure and my battery has a average
lifetime of 1.5 days

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/1148fc33/attachment-0002.bin>

[Timo Sirainen]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder.

Assuming NOTIFY extension isn't implemented by both. (Dovecot v2.2 hopefully will have it, and K-9 apparently is interested in adding it too after that.)

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?

Like mentioned previously in this thread, you can disable the "ping"s in Dovecot. And even when they happen Dovecot makes them happen at the same time. So I think the power usage difference between 1 connection and 100 connections isn't much.

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

This is not an argument. You can have hundred of folders sorted by
sieve and really need to know if there new mail
in any of it

surely IT IS an argument

on a non-iPhone you can chosse what is important
your agrumentation is even one argument more against iPhone

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder

as proven by other devices there is no limitation

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your phone
will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices

again: how does it help me if I NEED to check them?

and no, IMAP has no limitations proven by Android-client
my Samsung Galaxy S3 has around 25 push folders

no problem with K9 mail to have them in my "common inbox"
including my own sent messages while on the desktop i
use the folder structure and my battery has a average
lifetime of 1.5 days

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/1148fc33/attachment-0004.bin>

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get changes.

typically the client opens a connecton for each folder to check

Sure, it's better.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
But any of this solution will eat battery very fast, proportionally
to count of folders to check.

and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

This is not an argument. You can have hundred of folders sorted by sieve
and really need to know if there new mail in any of it.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder.

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your
phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices.

Post by Reindl Harald
it's a limitation from Apple because they have not the
knowledge to implement relieable mail-clients see below
the removed posting on apple-support (first paragraphs
german but posting and answer from Apple below in english)
http://www.rhsoft.net/

I'm not fan of apple anyway, so do not interested in this discussion at all.

Sergey S. Kovalev.

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get changes.

typically the client opens a connecton for each folder to check

Sure, it's better.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
But any of this solution will eat battery very fast, proportionally
to count of folders to check.

and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

This is not an argument. You can have hundred of folders sorted by sieve
and really need to know if there new mail in any of it.

Post by Reindl Harald

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

As I told - IMAP limitation is to control only one folder.

Post by Reindl Harald
how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

If you open 10 connections to IMAP server and will IDLE on them - your
phone will wake up to reply for ping in every of that 10 connections.
Imagine if there will 100 folders?
Therefore IMAP really have limitation to use it on mobile devices.

Post by Reindl Harald
it's a limitation from Apple because they have not the
knowledge to implement relieable mail-clients see below
the removed posting on apple-support (first paragraphs
german but posting and answer from Apple below in english)
http://www.rhsoft.net/

I'm not fan of apple anyway, so do not interested in this discussion at all.

Sergey S. Kovalev.

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get changes.

typically the client opens a connecton for each folder to check

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
But any of this solution will eat battery very fast, proportionally
to count of folders to check.

and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

it's a limitation from Apple because they have not the
knowledge to implement relieable mail-clients see below
the removed posting on apple-support (first paragraphs
german but posting and answer from Apple below in english)

http://www.rhsoft.net/





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/9717a4eb/attachment-0002.bin>

[Reindl Harald]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev

Post by Reindl Harald
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get changes.

typically the client opens a connecton for each folder to check

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
But any of this solution will eat battery very fast, proportionally
to count of folders to check.

and that is why K9 on android let you select which folders
are relevant for you on the mobile and which should be
completly ignored and display the selected in "common inbox"

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not implemented
in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection

so it is not "it's IMAP limitation"

how does help me "save battery" if i have a folder-structure
maintained by sieve if i do not get my new mails?

it's a limitation from Apple because they have not the
knowledge to implement relieable mail-clients see below
the removed posting on apple-support (first paragraphs
german but posting and answer from Apple below in english)

http://www.rhsoft.net/





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/9717a4eb/attachment-0004.bin>

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use IMAP server as backend.

this may be a IPHONE limitation as all the apple
clients are buggy like hell since years
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get
changes. But any of this solution will eat battery very fast,
proportionally to count of folders to check.
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not
implemented in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection.

Sergey S. Kovalev

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by Reindl Harald

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use IMAP server as backend.

this may be a IPHONE limitation as all the apple
clients are buggy like hell since years
i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

Sure, it can do it in two ways: open several connections to imap server
(one per folder) or periodically change current directory and get
changes. But any of this solution will eat battery very fast,
proportionally to count of folders to check.
I think that battery life is the reason, why this feature is not
implemented in iPhone. It will use only one IMAP connection.

Sergey S. Kovalev

[Robert Schetterer]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use
IMAP server as backend.

z-push works nice here with android, also the new horde beta has now
calender, abook, notes, mail sync

[Reindl Harald]

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use IMAP server as backend.

this may be a IPHONE limitation as all the apple
clients are buggy like hell since years

i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/176b4c4d/attachment-0002.bin>

[Robert Schetterer]

Post by Sergey S. Kovalev
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use
IMAP server as backend.

z-push works nice here with android, also the new horde beta has now
calender, abook, notes, mail sync

[Reindl Harald]

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use IMAP server as backend.

this may be a IPHONE limitation as all the apple
clients are buggy like hell since years

i have a Android with K9, a lot of folders where messages are stored
by sieve-scirpts and on my phone i can actively select which folders
should be used for push

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://dovecot.org/pipermail/dovecot/attachments/20120810/176b4c4d/attachment-0004.bin>

[dovecot]

Hi All,

Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

Has anyone successfully deployed this? If yes, did you have to use an
app from the Apple store? For me the IMAP process works, however it's
clearly not notifying the client when new email is detected on the
server.

cya

Craig

[Timo Sirainen]

Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..

[Luigi Rosa]

Post by dovecot
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove it and
go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.





Ciao,
luigi

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by dovecot
Hi All,
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.
Has anyone successfully deployed this? If yes, did you have to use an
app from the Apple store? For me the IMAP process works, however it's
clearly not notifying the client when new email is detected on the
server.
cya
Craig

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's
IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold
look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use
IMAP server as backend.

Sergey S. Kovalev

[dovecot]

Hi All,

Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

Has anyone successfully deployed this? If yes, did you have to use an
app from the Apple store? For me the IMAP process works, however it's
clearly not notifying the client when new email is detected on the
server.

cya

Craig

[Timo Sirainen]

Related question that came to my mind: Does anyone know if XAPPLEPUSHSERVICE feature can be implemented by any server, or does it require cooperation between the server and the mobile network operator? I'm guessing the latter..

[Luigi Rosa]

Post by dovecot
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.

I used K-9 client on Android for one year with push, but I had to remove it and
go back to integrated email client because it drained the battery.





Ciao,
luigi

[Sergey S. Kovalev]

Post by dovecot
Hi All,
Probably a very common question now days.
I'd like to configure our iPhones at work to go directly to my dovecot
server (currently dovecot-2.0.9-2.el6_1.1.x86_64). Using the IMAP IDLE
(push email) protocol.
Has anyone successfully deployed this? If yes, did you have to use an
app from the Apple store? For me the IMAP process works, however it's
clearly not notifying the client when new email is detected on the
server.
cya
Craig

iPhone will not notify for new mail in any folder, except INBOX - it's
IMAP limitation.
IMAP IDLE monitor only one selected folder.
If you need notifying of new mail in copule of mail folders you shold
look for ActiveSync realization.
On small mailboxes it's z-push and tine20 for example - they can use
IMAP server as backend.

Sergey S. Kovalev