IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: Missing requirement in draft-sparks-genarea-imaparch?

Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com> Wed, 03 April 2013 14:46 UTC

Return-Path: <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E8E7621F8D85 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 07:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.6
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.6 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 38EZQQwC9PQW for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 07:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from shaman.nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2606621F8BBB for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 3 Apr 2013 07:46:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from unnumerable.tekelec.com ([4.30.77.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by shaman.nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id r33EkUlO062604 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-CAMELLIA256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 3 Apr 2013 09:46:31 -0500 (CDT) (envelope-from rjsparks@nostrum.com)
Message-ID: <515C40C8.1000106@nostrum.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 09:46:32 -0500
From: Robert Sparks <rjsparks@nostrum.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.7; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130307 Thunderbird/17.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Sam Hartman <hartmans-ietf@mit.edu>
Subject: Re: Missing requirement in draft-sparks-genarea-imaparch?
References: <20130326204553.17292.36013.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <5153571C.9070800@nostrum.com> <CBA0E06E-C59D-43C4-BD13-6DD5AB7AF1B7@cs.georgetown.edu> <6.2.5.6.2.20130328111022.0ceeb7d8@resistor.net> <5159FF0E.9080202@nostrum.com> <tsl38v9q0a6.fsf@mit.edu>
In-Reply-To: <tsl38v9q0a6.fsf@mit.edu>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Received-SPF: pass (shaman.nostrum.com: 4.30.77.1 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: SM <sm@resistor.net>, Burger Eric <eburger@cs.georgetown.edu>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 03 Apr 2013 14:46:34 -0000

On 4/1/13 6:49 PM, Sam Hartman wrote:
> May I suggest that the specific details of this be left to the
> implementation effort.  What is easy to implement in this area depends
> significantly on what platform (and here I mean more imap libraries and
> imap server technology than say python vs ruby vs .net vs C) A simple
> requirement like the implementation should consider how to handle abuse
> of message marking.
Sam - I agree, and was taking a very similar approach in my working copy 
already.
Let me know if you think -06 has it right.

RjS

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email