IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Tue, 05 March 2024 11:46 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 CB1A2C14F616 for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 03:46:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.177
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.177 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=-0.091, RCVD_IN_ZEN_BLOCKED_OPENDNS=0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01, T_SPF_HELO_TEMPERROR=0.01, T_SPF_TEMPERROR=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 fmhs3HmLr6t6 for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 03:46:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from waldorf.isode.com (waldorf.isode.com [62.232.206.188]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0395C14F5EC for <extra@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 03:46:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1709639179; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=yxrdq3om+NbfANK0C+CKPWjCnduHl4wEXXJrhntbido=; 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=MD/bTyy9Y26Tj9usTHwPB3q1RMqqvComYXF48aKWUbFBp+y/hGioR3JA7HYV9ueyDhHLNe 3RG9qlQyglsqd7yWFTw9jV+N1+OpmbexqQeWejeWYQMCnB/a9JWzRFY8fJrqJheH99U7hn Xyx/nmqk0u8op7oQqw1LI0Fr1AK3njg=;
Received: from [172.20.1.98] (dhcp-98.isode.net [172.20.1.98]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <ZecGCwAIBQq5@waldorf.isode.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2024 11:46:19 +0000
Message-ID: <77c972d5-4ad8-c44b-b7a3-65173f11d594@isode.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 11:46:25 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.14.0
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, extra@ietf.org
References: <170769454546.35179.3683352028983215625@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAL0qLwY5p3wT0sxFmb2w2vHU+KdnYY8uDiu6FjWXYY_rUvm2cw@mail.gmail.com>
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwY5p3wT0sxFmb2w2vHU+KdnYY8uDiu6FjWXYY_rUvm2cw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------DivJm8uFGvfJSKyzPNGWddAZ"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/Wy731KqdTXZvnjSoSzMMOwDj4kQ>
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: Tue, 05 Mar 2024 11:46:45 -0000

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?
> 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.

> Off to Last Call.

Thank you,

Alexey

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email