IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [imapext] AD review of draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-06 (Section 2)

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Fri, 11 December 2015 10:40 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A89B21A8754; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 02:40:21 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.011
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.011 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=ham
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 CIghV_XuKInm; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 02:40:20 -0800 (PST)
Received: from waldorf.isode.com (waldorf.isode.com [62.232.206.188]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0464F1A711A; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 02:40:20 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1449830419; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=israSpQqf+cpkD9fsUAlezoe5ythNtbACmzY6ZuLXYM=; 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=Egaw8tt8hFJ0xeeFHYEXQQjRVa4mTiIeNCdHBk5GKJHGE/D09RlQwPxgKXJmOAxy81hbjK 4s8fN22WEbY8jY4wW348skffOsLDsoldV7lRZE5m3a3m/rKV/IeL5JsbjQFRmCZ1GBk3yi Uok/dIaARxSECOlhH98XfIdJLlum2b0=;
Received: from [172.20.1.215] (dhcp-215.isode.net [172.20.1.215]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <VmqoEgBSXKoj@waldorf.isode.com>; Fri, 11 Dec 2015 10:40:19 +0000
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, Naren <narendrasingh.bisht@gmail.com>, imapext@ietf.org
References: <CALaySJLE_6+vbeB-SeMk1VHDAtq2VvS9yKe9dhQ2LTzr4y=oTg@mail.gmail.com> <DEA84B8F15992B4EA87D5CF3D0EC5F98AE4FCFD8@DRTW-EXMB04.telecom.sna.samsung.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20151209223348.0d1a66e0@resistor.net> <CAHC+rVHPmcpLKogQdFrCo+P-GaALoWLLGEw=MeA7hnarQhEYLw@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20151210080422.10a00dc0@elandnews.com> <CAHC+rVEoexsnruY_uAY7t_S4z3PQs6ff8aX7x=48g==98pU4Vg@mail.gmail.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20151210101014.11999820@elandnews.com>
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Message-ID: <566AA7F7.8050607@isode.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 10:39:51 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.2.0
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20151210101014.11999820@elandnews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/imapext/49ss_Y6_AANo-EOXZwPhQum9Qzo>
Cc: Narendra Bisht <ns.bisht@sta.samsung.com>, draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension@ietf.org, Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Subject: Re: [imapext] AD review of draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-06 (Section 2)
X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions <imapext.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/imapext>, <mailto:imapext-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/imapext/>
List-Post: <mailto:imapext@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:imapext-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext>, <mailto:imapext-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 10:40:21 -0000

On 10/12/2015 18:24, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hi Naren,
> At 09:15 10-12-2015, Naren wrote:
>> We can rephrase that sentence to
>>
>> "IMAP server MAY advertise this CAPABILITY before or after user has 
>> logged in.The client SHOULD be ready to handle this CAPABILITY 
>> irrespective of user authenticated state"
>>
>> We do not see any implications in this being advertised before user 
>> logged in.
>> Can you elaborate more about your concern on this.
>
> By implications, I meant:
>
>   (i)  What are the advantages of advertising the upload limit before 
> the user
>        has logged in?
A server can advertise a limit which applies to all or most users.
>   (ii) What are the disadvantages of advertising the upload limit 
> before the
>        user has logged in?
Other than a few extra bytes in the initial CAPABILITY, there are no 
disadvantages I can think of.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email