IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Extra] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-extra-imap-uidonly-06

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Wed, 13 March 2024 14:47 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F43DC14F5F2 for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:47:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.106
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.106 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, URIBL_DBL_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, URIBL_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id eKN3aHlcQKxr for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from statler.isode.com (Statler.isode.com [62.232.206.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF36C14F60C for <extra@ietf.org>; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 07:47:43 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1710341261; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=z/Z3SY9K3lGrjI9H6mK2YX9Z99BPfAhUcB6yaBql1p0=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=b9KIghgZXrRK6nO+7EmMmxf04xrVAwzAbEBf/ZLQuCGZGDE43Ab8BJ0CNw4Cm10flLim1e rICgbLccaSszfOl1QHMwfZAtR/GFMD1wOcOKxHdGHDpir6DvQSPVPWvP3ryGBxMXRF/UWH YVDxOpEhL64Uj4iH8HlCMCJFM2lZUBU=;
Received: from [192.168.1.222] ((unknown) [31.117.159.37]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <ZfG8jAAOiWBz@statler.isode.com>; Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:47:40 +0000
X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: NORDNS
Message-ID: <a8080722-1eed-4a2f-acf1-5287b60dde14@isode.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:47:39 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Cc: extra@ietf.org
References: <170769454546.35179.3683352028983215625@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwY5p3wT0sxFmb2w2vHU+KdnYY8uDiu6FjWXYY_rUvm2cw@mail.gmail.com> <77c972d5-4ad8-c44b-b7a3-65173f11d594@isode.com> <CAL0qLwZiAaUPQUZtzmOGYpb5xLjdJ-_WeLPyTeMss-FFJkZsVQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwZiAaUPQUZtzmOGYpb5xLjdJ-_WeLPyTeMss-FFJkZsVQ@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------NdZEQKPDiCsvJTC6IUB0dqNR"
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/1jR2oxKcOo4ifh8MxHn-6yo6ZVc>
Subject: Re: [Extra] Publication has been requested for draft-ietf-extra-imap-uidonly-06
X-BeenThere: extra@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.39
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email mailstore and eXtensions To Revise or Amend <extra.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/extra/>
List-Post: <mailto:extra@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2024 14:47:47 -0000

On 13/03/2024 05:28, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 5, 2024 at 3:46 AM Alexey Melnikov 
> <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> wrote:
>
>     Hi Murray,
>
>     On 01/03/2024 22:48, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>>     On Sun, Feb 11, 2024 at 3:36 PM Bron Gondwana via Datatracker
>>     <noreply@ietf.org> wrote:
>>
>>         Bron Gondwana has requested publication of
>>         draft-ietf-extra-imap-uidonly-06 as Experimental on behalf of
>>         the EXTRA working group.
>>
>>         Please verify the document's state at
>>         https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-extra-imap-uidonly/
>>
>>
>>     Why does the shepherd writeup identify RFC 3501 as a normative
>>     downward reference?
>     In most recent RFCs we want to signal that an extension is
>     compatible with both IMAP4rev2 (RFC 9051) and IMAP4rev1 (RFC
>     3501). Is this Ok?
>
>
> So what's weird is that I asked the question, but then started the 
> Last Call anyway, and the datatracker didn't automatically identify 
> the downward reference in its auto-generated Last Call text.  This may 
> or may not be a problem, but I'll sort it out.
Great, thanks. I think there were several RFCs published referencing 
both, so this shouldn't be a problem from the process point of view.
>
>>     Since this is Experimental, is it worth describing somewhere how
>>     the experiment will be run, who will collect results, how those
>>     will be communicated back to the IETF, etc.?  See, for instance,
>>     Section 7 of RFC 6541.  Not required, but it might be helpful to
>>     describe how this isn't something open-ended.
>
>     Basically we want to gather more implementation experience and see
>     that it doesn't break client implementations. If you think this is
>     worth saying in the document, I can add.
>
> Gather where?  Should we give those details?  Where is an implementer 
> supposed to send their results?  Just something to consider.

I think this partially depends to whether IESG is Ok with including the 
current EXTRA WGmailing list address in the document. I remember we 
tried to avoid this sort of things in the IANA Considerations section.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email