IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02

Jayantheesh S B <j.sb@sea.samsung.com> Wed, 10 February 2016 15:25 UTC

Return-Path: <j.sb@sea.samsung.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 E490B1B2BDD for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:25:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 09ldGiV3WY2v for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:25:42 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wguard01.sdsamerica.net (mx1.sdsamerica.net [206.67.236.191]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A681B2BD4 for <imapext@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:25:42 -0800 (PST)
From: Jayantheesh S B <j.sb@sea.samsung.com>
To: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>, "imapext@ietf.org" <imapext@ietf.org>, "alexey.melnikov@isode.com" <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Thread-Topic: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02
Thread-Index: AQHRYFJLefKm//RnxkaiYA8SdKsMh58lbKiw
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:25:40 +0000
Message-ID: <190adcbcae3d4ba1abc0308ec903ac04@SEAMBX01.sea.samsung.com>
References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com>
In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received-SPF: none
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/imapext/HWE4_h6OqAeorXC9siKH_zTxgGc>
Subject: Re: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02
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: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:25:49 -0000

This version of document looks fine for me.  

I see text "non-synchronizing" is not mentioned consistent across the document.
Some places its mentioned as "non- synchronizing" and in some place I see "non synchronizing".

Also I see To Do section in the document with below text.

"Exact semantics of LITERAL- is still in flux."

This section can be removed once if the semantics has been defined. 

-----Original Message-----
From: imapext [mailto:imapext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of S Moonesamy
Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 3:17 PM
To: imapext@ietf.org
Subject: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02

Hello,

This message starts a Working Group Last Call for "IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals" (draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02).  The I-D can be accessed at
https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02

This Working Group Last Call will end on Saturday 20th February.  Please review the I-D and send comments to the imapext@ietf.org mailing list.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy (as imapapdb WG Chair)

_______________________________________________
imapext mailing list
imapext@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email