IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Extra] AD Review of draft-ietf-extra-imap4rev2

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Sun, 24 January 2021 12:27 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 5062F3A0BC7 for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 04:27:06 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.35
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.35 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.262, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_KAM_HTML_FONT_INVALID=0.01, URIBL_BLOCKED=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 ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 5RuCKQ7ICDWc for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 04:27:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from waldorf.isode.com (waldorf.isode.com [62.232.206.188]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B7EB73A0BC2 for <extra@ietf.org>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 04:27:04 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1611491223; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=fV31kqYFjlcQcJ1nm5RbVMDhEjgM/+UpLMY+/sMpv2I=; 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=uOb17WvbZ3YTvv1NQg7UQLT1jGbFl8ERDIqLNy5YqA9uPc2YwWWq4011gt+6ylWaV+tdYM rQJYyri2gabVJng2qaMmebxeVq3XURHiMJpu6aeWuPgHURUlUJRorQiC0ZVrC34niFZf1C XaP5bCm9fm9Yjl6p8R2PI/IV7QEzQ7k=;
Received: from [192.168.0.5] (4e697ac1.skybroadband.com [78.105.122.193]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <YA1nlgAuQVKo@waldorf.isode.com>; Sun, 24 Jan 2021 12:27:03 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
Cc: extra@ietf.org
References: <CAL0qLwaLa+PuGWRrKTbpmDa_SWKT9ZQUEQ9dsPgXfUmTzcYAYw@mail.gmail.com> <bb662e64-626c-914b-de59-f85ef18ee5e3@isode.com> <CAL0qLwYXht2r_83PCZo6+tJUJAoYCd0EoGyCHm6BQEQ=YhWT-A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <5f5be9be-347b-52c3-399d-37c731f0be59@isode.com>
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 12:27:02 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.5.1
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwYXht2r_83PCZo6+tJUJAoYCd0EoGyCHm6BQEQ=YhWT-A@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------54EFE22022E4341279B906E7"
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/FrbOLZNnNIqGKpE7ezOFAYSYi3U>
Subject: Re: [Extra] AD Review of draft-ietf-extra-imap4rev2
X-BeenThere: extra@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Sun, 24 Jan 2021 12:27:06 -0000

Hi Murray,

Following up on a few little things:

On 04/01/2021 17:21, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:

> On Mon, Jan 4, 2021 at 6:05 AM Alexey Melnikov 
> <alexey.melnikov@isode.com <mailto:alexey.melnikov@isode.com>> wrote:
>
  [snip]

>
>>
>>     Section 6.3.9.2
>>
>>
>>     This section (and the previous) require that \Subscribed be
>>     computed accurately before the response is generated.  How does
>>     this square with the text in Section 6.3.9 that insists replies
>>     come quickly?
>>
>     You have to comply with both :-). It is quite important for
>     \Subscribed to be accurate, so implementations need to do that
>     while maintaining reasonable performance.
>
>
> OK.  I just wanted to make sure the reader isn't getting "You MUST be 
> fast!" from one direction while also doing "You MUST do all this 
> expensive stuff!" from the other with no guidance about how to resolve 
> this.
I will clarify this in the next version.
>
>     [snip]
>>
>>     The second paragraph also gets into the presentation of the
>>     reply.  This is human factors stuff the IETF tends to avoid.  Are
>>     we sure it belongs here?
>>
>     This is copy of the text from another RFC and I personally found
>     this text to be useful when implementing.
>
>
> You might consider putting these presentation advice paragraphs into 
> an appendix too.

Due to a similar comment in SecDir review, I now removed the offending 
text. I think this should address your comment.

Best Regards,

Alexey

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email