GENWiki

Premier IT Outsourcing and Support Services within the UK

User Tools

Site Tools


rfc:rfc5466

Network Working Group A. Melnikov Request for Comments: 5466 C. King Category: Standards Track Isode Ltd

                                                         February 2009
            IMAP4 Extension for Named Searches (Filters)

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) 2009 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
 document authors.  All rights reserved.
 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/
 license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
 Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
 and restrictions with respect to this document.

Abstract

 The document defines a way to persistently store named IMAP (RFC
 3501) searches on the server.  Such named searches can be
 subsequently referenced in a SEARCH or any other command that accepts
 a search criterion as a parameter.

Table of Contents

 1.  Introduction and Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
 2.  Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
 3.  IMAP Protocol Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
   3.1.  FILTER SEARCH Criterion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
   3.2.  Managing Filters Using SETMETADATA/GETMETADATA Commands . . 4
 4.  Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
 5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
 6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
 7.  Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
 8.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 1] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

1. Introduction and Overview

 Persistent named searches described in this document allow clients to
 save favorite searches on the server.  Such saved searches can save
 bandwidth for clients that need to regularly repeat them.
 The FILTERS IMAP extension adds a new FILTER search criterion for
 referencing persistent named searches (a.k.a. "filters"), as well as
 reuses GETMETADATA/SETMETADATA commands [METADATA] for listing/
 creating/updating/deleting such filters.
 A filter can be private (only accessible to the logged-in user) or
 public (accessible to all logged-in users).  Both a private and a
 public filter with the same name can exist at the same time.  If both
 filter types with the same name exist, the FILTER SEARCH criterion
 (see Section 3.1) MUST use the value of the private filter;
 otherwise, it MUST use the value of the filter that exists.
 Let us call a pair of filter name and filter type a "typed filter".
 Each typed filter can have a value (which is a valid IMAP SEARCH
 criteria conforming to ABNF for the "search-criteria" non-terminal)
 and an optional human-readable description.  The SETMETADATA command
 creates or updates the value and/or the description of a typed
 filter.
 Values of all search keys stored in a filter MUST be encoded in
 UTF-8.

2. Conventions Used in This Document

 In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and
 server, respectively.  If a single "C:" or "S:" label applies to
 multiple lines, then the line breaks between those lines are for
 editorial clarity only and are not part of the actual protocol
 exchange.
 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 [RFC2119].
 Basic familiarity with the METADATA-SERVER extension [METADATA] and
 terms defined therein is required to understand this document.

3. IMAP Protocol Changes

 The IMAP extension for persistent named searches is present in any
 IMAP4 implementation that advertises "FILTERS" as one of the
 supported capabilities in the CAPABILITY response or response code.

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 2] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

3.1. FILTER SEARCH Criterion

 The FILTER criterion for the SEARCH command allows a client to
 reference by name a filter stored on the server.  Such filter was
 created by setting the server annotation named "/private/filters/
 values/<filter_name>" (or the server annotation "/shared/filters/
 values/<filter_name>", if "/private/filters/values/<filter_name>"
 doesn't exist) using the SETMETADATA command as described in
 Section 3.2.
 Syntax: FILTER <filter_name>
 When the named filter exists, its search criterion (i.e., the
 associated entry value) is inserted verbatim instead of the FILTER
 search-key.  For example, the following SEARCH command
 C: a SEARCH UID 300:900 FILTER on-the-road SINCE "3-Dec-2002"
 would be equivalent to the following
 C: a SEARCH UID 300:900 OR SMALLER 5000 FROM "boss@example.com"
 SINCE "3-Dec-2002"
 assuming the filter "on-the-road" exists and contains the value 'OR
 SMALLER 5000 FROM "boss@example.com"'.
 A reference to a nonexistent or unaccessible (e.g., due to access
 control restrictions) filter MUST cause failure of the SEARCH command
 with the tagged NO response that includes the UNDEFINED-FILTER
 response code followed by the name of the nonexistent/unaccessible
 filter.
 Note the server SHOULD verify that each search criterion referenced
 by the FILTER search key is a full and correct search criterion.  For
 example, the server should fail the SEARCH command if its SEARCH
 criterion references a filter containing "OR SMALLER" search
 criterion, because this value is lacking one parameter and thus is
 not a fully specified search criterion.
 Note that a named filter itself can reference another filter using
 the FILTER search-key.  Implementations MUST be able to perform at
 least 3 substitution passes on the SEARCH command criterion.  If an
 implementation allows for more passes, it MUST implement some kind of
 loop detection.  If an implementation detects a loop or still sees a
 FILTER search-key after performing at least 3 substitutions, it MUST
 behave as if the specified filter doesn't exist (as described above).

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 3] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

 Note that use of the FILTER search key implies the CHARSET "UTF-8"
 parameter to the SEARCH/UID SEARCH command.  If the SEARCH/UID SEARCH
 command includes the explicit CHARSET parameter with the value other
 than "UTF-8" or "US-ASCII", then such command MUST result in the
 tagged BAD response from the server.  Such tagged response MUST
 contain the BADCHARSET response code (see [RFC3501]).

3.2. Managing Filters Using SETMETADATA/GETMETADATA Commands

 Any server compliant with this document MUST either implement the
 METADATA-SERVER (or METADATA) [METADATA] extension, or implement
 SETMETADATA/GETMETADATA commands described in [METADATA] so that they
 work for the case of empty mailbox name (i.e., for managing server
 annotations) and for the entries specified in this section.
 This document reserves two hierarchies of per-server entries under
 the "/private/filters/values" and "/shared/filters/values" roots (see
 [METADATA]) for storing filter values.  The value of a "/private/
 filters/values/<filter_name>" or a "/shared/filters/values/
 <filter_name>" server annotation is an IMAP SEARCH criteria,
 conforming to ABNF for the "search-criteria" non-terminal.  A name of
 a filter is governed by the ABNF for the "filter-name" non-terminal.
 Note that values of all search keys stored in these entries MUST be
 encoded in UTF-8.
 A new filter named "<filter_name>" can be created (or an existing
 filter can be modified) by storing a non-NIL value in the "/private/
 filters/values/<filter_name>" server entry (or in the "/shared/
 filters/values/<filter_name>") using the SETMETADATA [METADATA]
 command.  The server SHOULD verify that each search criterion stored
 in such a server entry is a full and correct search criterion.
 A filter can be deleted by storing the NIL value in both the
 "/private/filters/values/<filter_name>" and the "/shared/filters/
 values/<filter_name>" entries.
 A filter can be renamed by first creating a filter with the new name
 (that has the same value as the old one) and then deleting the filter
 with the old one.
 If both "/private/filters/values/<filter_name>" and "/shared/filters/
 values/<filter_name>" server annotations exist, then the value of the
 "/private/filters/values/<filter_name>" is used when evaluating the
 corresponding FILTER SEARCH key (see Section 3.1).  Otherwise the
 non-NIL (existent) value is used.

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 4] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

 If the server is unable to create a new typed filter because the
 maximum number of allowed filters has already been reached, the
 server MUST return a tagged NO response with a "[METADATA TOOMANY]"
 response code, as defined in [METADATA].
         C: a007 SETMETADATA "" ("/private/filters/values/on-the-road"
             "OR SMALLER 5000 FROM \"boss@example.com\"")
         S: a007 OK SETMETADATA complete
 Client implementation note: As multiple clients might read and write
 filter values, it is possible that one client will use a SEARCH key
 that might not be recognized by another client that tries to present
 a user interface for editing a filter value.  In order to help other
 clients to (partially) parse filter values for editing purposes, a
 client storing a filter value SHOULD use () around any SEARCH key not
 defined in [RFC3501].  For example, if there is an IMAP extension
 that defines a new x-dsfa SEARCH key that takes 2 parameters, then
 the following SEARCH criterion 'from "@example.com>" x-dsfa from 5'
 should be stored as 'from "@example.com>" (x-dsfa from 5)'.
 Note that filter names are restricted to a subset of US-ASCII, as
 described in Section 4.  So they might not always be meaningful to
 users and thus not necessarily suitable for display purposes.  In
 order to help with storing human-readable descriptions of filters,
 this document also reserves two hierarchies of server entries under
 the "/private/filters/descriptions" and "/shared/filters/
 descriptions" roots.  The value of a "/private/filters/descriptions/
 <filter_name>" or a "/shared/filters/descriptions/<filter_name>"
 server annotation is a human-readable description for the
 <filter_name> filter, encoded in UTF-8 [UTF-8].  If the "/private/
 filters/descriptions/<filter_name>" server annotation exists, its
 value is used by the client as the filter description.  Otherwise,
 the value of the "/shared/filters/descriptions/<filter_name>" server
 annotation is used as the filter description.  In the absence of both
 the "/private/filters/descriptions/<filter_name>" and the "/shared/
 filters/descriptions/<filter_name>" entries, the client MAY display
 the name of the filter as its description.
 The description string SHOULD be annotated with one or more language
 tags [RFC4646] as specified in Chapter 16.9 of [Unicode].  In the
 absence of any language tag, the "i-default" [RFC2277] language
 SHOULD be assumed.  Description in multiple languages MAY be present
 in a single description string.  This is done by concatenating
 descriptions in multiple languages into a single string, each
 description prefixed with its language tag, for example
 "<ru><...description in Russian...><fr-ca><...description in
 French...>".  Note that here <ru> is a language tag consisting of 3
 Unicode characters: <U+E0001>, <U+E0072>, <U+E0075>; and <fr-ca> is a

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 5] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

 language tag consisting of 6 Unicode characters: <U+E0001>,
 <U+E0066>, <U+E0072>, <U+E002D>, <U+E0063>, <U+E0061>.

4. Formal Syntax

 The following syntax specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur
 Form (ABNF) notation as specified in [ABNF].
 Non-terminals referenced but not defined below are as defined by
 [RFC3501] or [IMAPABNF].
 Except as noted otherwise, all alphabetic characters are case-
 insensitive.  The use of upper or lower case characters to define
 token strings is for editorial clarity only.  Implementations MUST
 accept these strings in a case-insensitive fashion.
 capability            =/ "FILTERS"
 search-criteria       =  search-key *(SP search-key)
 search-key            =/  "FILTER" SP filter-name
                       ;; New SEARCH criterion for referencing filters
 filter-name           =  1*<any ATOM-CHAR except "/">
                       ;; Note that filter-name disallows UTF-8 or
                       ;; the following characters: "(", ")", "{",
                       ;; " ", "%", "*", "]".  See definition of
                       ;; ATOM-CHAR [RFC3501].
 resp-text-code        =/  "UNDEFINED-FILTER" SP filter-name

5. Security Considerations

 General issues relevant to [RFC3501] (in particular to the SEARCH
 command) and METADATA-SERVER extension [METADATA] are also relevant
 to this document.
 Note that excessive use of filters can potentially simplify denial-
 of-service attacks, especially if combined with poor implementations
 and lack of loop detection (i.e., detection of filters referencing
 each other to create a loop).  Servers that allow for anonymous
 access SHOULD NOT allow anonymous users to create/edit/delete
 filters.
 Also note that stored filters can potentially disclose personal
 information about users.  When confidentiality of such information is
 important, clients MUST use TLS and/or SASL security layer (or
 similar) as recommended in [RFC3501].  Also, clients should use

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 6] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

 private filters instead of public, unless they desire to share such
 information with other users.
 As always, it is important to thoroughly test clients and servers
 when implementing this extension.

6. IANA Considerations

 IMAP4 capabilities are registered by publishing a Standards Track or
 IESG-approved Experimental RFC.  The IMAP4 capabilities registry is
 available from http://www.iana.org.
 This document defines the FILTERS IMAP capability.  IANA has added it
 to the registry.
 IANA has added the following 4 entries to the [METADATA] registry:
 To:  iana@iana.org
 Subject:  IMAP METADATA Entry Registration
 Type:  Server
 Name:  /private/filters/values/<filter_name>
 Description:  Contains an IMAP SEARCH criteria.  Defined in RFC 5466.
 Content-type:  text/plain; charset=utf-8
 Contact person:  Alexey Melnikov
 Email:  alexey.melnikov@isode.com
 To:  iana@iana.org
 Subject:  IMAP METADATA Entry Registration
 Type:  Server
 Name:  /shared/filters/values/<filter_name>
 Description:  Contains an IMAP SEARCH criterion.  Defined in RFC
    5466.
 Content-type:  text/plain; charset=utf-8
 Contact person:  Alexey Melnikov
 Email:  alexey.melnikov@isode.com
 To:  iana@iana.org
 Subject:  IMAP METADATA Entry Registration
 Type:  Server
 Name:  /private/filters/descriptions/<filter_name>
 Description:  Contains a user-specific human-readable description of
    a named SEARCH criterion stored in the /private/filters/values/
    <filter_name> or /shared/filters/values/<filter_name> annotation.
    The value is in UTF-8.  Defined in RFC 5466.
 Content-type:  text/plain; charset=utf-8
 Contact person:  Alexey Melnikov
 Email:  alexey.melnikov@isode.com

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 7] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

 To:  iana@iana.org
 Subject:  IMAP METADATA Entry Registration
 Type:  Server
 Name:  /shared/filters/descriptions/<filter_name>
 Description:  Contains a global (shared among all users) human-
    readable description of a named SEARCH criterion stored in the
    /private/filters/values/<filter_name> or /shared/filters/values/
    <filter_name> annotation.  The value is in UTF-8.  Defined in RFC
    5466.
 Content-type:  text/plain; charset=utf-8
 Contact person:  Alexey Melnikov
 Email:  alexey.melnikov@isode.com

7. Acknowledgments

 Thanks to David Cridland, Arnt Gulbrandsen, Chris Newman, and Timo
 Sirainen for comments and suggestions on this document.  Special
 thank you to Brian E. Carpenter for the GenArt review.

8. Normative References

 [ABNF]      Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, Ed., "Augmented BNF for
             Syntax Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234,
             January 2008.
 [IMAPABNF]  Melnikov, A. and C. Daboo, "Collected Extensions to IMAP4
             ABNF", RFC 4466, April 2006.
 [METADATA]  Daboo, C., "The IMAP METADATA Extension", RFC 5464,
             February 2009.
 [RFC2119]   Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
             Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
 [RFC2277]   Alvestrand, H., "IETF Policy on Character Sets and
             Languages", BCP 18, RFC 2277, January 1998.
 [RFC3501]   Crispin, M., "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION
             4rev1", RFC 3501, March 2003.
 [RFC4646]   Phillips, A. and M. Davis, "Tags for Identifying
             Languages", BCP 47, RFC 4646, September 2006.
 [UTF-8]     Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
             10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, November 2003.
 [Unicode]   "The Unicode Standard 5.0", Unicode 5.0, 2007,
             <http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.0.0/>.

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 8] RFC 5466 IMAP Filters February 2009

Authors' Addresses

 Alexey Melnikov
 Isode Ltd
 5 Castle Business Village
 36 Station Road
 Hampton, Middlesex  TW12 2BX
 UK
 EMail: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com
 Curtis King
 Isode Ltd
 5 Castle Business Village
 36 Station Road
 Hampton, Middlesex  TW12 2BX
 UK
 EMail: Curtis.King@isode.com

Melnikov & King Standards Track [Page 9]

/data/webs/external/dokuwiki/data/pages/rfc/rfc5466.txt · Last modified: 2009/02/18 17:30 by 127.0.0.1

Donate Powered by PHP Valid HTML5 Valid CSS Driven by DokuWiki