Re: [EAI] AD review of draft-ietf-eai-pop-06

[Randall Gellens <[e-mail]>]

At 9:21 PM +0100 7/18/09, Alexey Melnikov wrote:

>>  3.1. The UTF8 Command
>>
>>     The octet count (size) of a message reported in a response to the
>>     LIST command SHOULD match the actual number of octets sent in a RETR
>>     response.  Sizes reported elsewhere, such as in STAT responses and
>>     non-standardized free-form text in positive status indicators
>>     (following "+OK") need not be accurate, but it is preferable if they
>>     are.
>
>  I would like to hear some justification for returning inaccurate 
> sizes (and for the SHOULD instead of a MUST).

Depending on server implementation, it might be expensive to 
calculate an exact size, and so shouldn't be forced without good 
reason.  I'm thinking tat the LIST size is mostly to give the client 
an idea if it wants to download the message or part of it.  Also, the 
free-form sizes are not part of the spec in any way, just common 
practice.  I'm aware that there have been cases where clients went 
bonkers or casters-up (behaved badly) if the server put an inaccurate 
count in the free-form text, but hopefully this isn't a reason to now 
mandate that such sizes be included at all, much less be accurate.

-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly selected tag: ---------------
Please ignore previous fortune.