Comment on How IMAP works under the hoodparentComments−throw0101d1yInteresting no attempt has been made to make it at least be less heavy on networked bytes.Kind of a surprising observation given the first spec (IMAP2) was released in 1998, when dial-up was still a thing:* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1064IMAP4 was in 1994:* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1730ITU V.32 gave us 9.6 kbit/s in 1998, and V.34 was 28.8 kbit/s in 1994:* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ITU-T_V-series_recomme...−throw0101d1ys/1998/1988/
Comments
Kind of a surprising observation given the first spec (IMAP2) was released in 1998, when dial-up was still a thing:
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1064
IMAP4 was in 1994:
* https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1730
ITU V.32 gave us 9.6 kbit/s in 1998, and V.34 was 28.8 kbit/s in 1994:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ITU-T_V-series_recomme...
s/1998/1988/