Re: AD review comments on draft-ietf-imapext-condstore

[Alexey Melnikov <[e-mail]>]

[e-mail] wrote:

>
> Pete asked me to last call this document. However, my AD review turned up
> a number of errors, mostly editorial in nature. There are enough of these
> that I think they need to be corrected in a revised I-D before 
> proceeding.
>
> - - - - - -
>
> Section 2, fifth paragraph: A reference to [ANNOTATE] should be added.
>
> Section 2, seventh paragraph: extention -> extension
>
> Section 4, second paragraph: "[IMAP4]" -> "[IMAP4] or [ANNOTATE]"
>
> There are lots of ABNF errors. The production:
>
> entry-name          = entry-name-flag / entry-annotate-name
>    should be:
>
> entry-name          = entry-flag-name / entry-annotate-name
>    (There is no entry-name-flag production.) The production:
>
>    entry-flag-name     = '"' "/flags/" attr-flag '"'
>
> isn't syntactically valid and needs to be changed to:
>
>    entry-flag-name     = DQUOTE "/flags/" attr-flag DQUOTE
>
> (The DQUOTE production is used in RFC 3501, whose ABNF is available to
> this document.) The production:
>
>    entry-type-resp     = "priv" | "shared"
>
> should be:
>
>    entry-type-resp     = "priv" / "shared"
>
> The production:
>
>    entry-type-req      = entry-type-resp | "all"
>
> should be:
>
>    entry-type-req      = entry-type-resp / "all"
>
> The production:
>
>    store               = "STORE" SP set store-modifiers SP 
> store-att-flags
>
> should read:
>
>    store               = "STORE" SP sequence-set store-modifiers
>                          SP store-att-flags 

> The production:
>
>    fetch               = "FETCH" SP sequence-set SP ("ALL" / "FULL" /
>                          "FAST" / fetch-att /
>                          "(" fetch-att *(SP fetch-att) ")") 
> [SPfetch-modifiers]
>
> should read:
>
>    fetch               = "FETCH" SP sequence-set SP ("ALL" / "FULL" /
>                          "FAST" / fetch-att /
>                          "(" fetch-att *(SP fetch-att) ")") [SP 
> fetch-modifiers] 

Actually, this production is correct (there is a space between SP and 
fetch-modifiers.

> The production:
>
>    mod-sequence-valzer = "0" | mod-sequence-value
>
> should be:
>
>    mod-sequence-valzer = "0" / mod-sequence-value
>
> The production name "search_sort_mod_seq" needs to be changed to
> "search-sort-mod-seq" everywhere. (Underscors aren't allowed in 
> production
> names.)
>
> Security considerations:
>
> The statement "It is believed that the Conditional STORE extension
> doesn't raise any new security concerns that are not already discussed
> in [IMAP4]" is correct as far as it goes. However, this extension
> provides a means by which an IMAP store can be used for potentially
> criticial applications involving multiple clients that could not be
> supported before. This may have the effect of making correct IMAP
> server behavior more important. Accordingly, I suggest amending the
> section to read:
>
> It is believed that the Conditional STORE extension doesn't raise
> any new security concerns that are not already discussed in [IMAP4].
> However, the availability of this extension may make it possible
> for IMAP4 to be used in critical applications it could not be used
> for previously, making correct IMAP server implementation and
> operation in even more important.
>
> Section 7: The wording here is awkward. I suggest changing it to read:
> "This document defines  the CONDSTORE and SORT=MODSEQ IMAP capabilities.
> IANA should add them to the registry accordingly."
>
> Acknowledgements, third paragraph:  "Authors" -> "The authors"
>
> That's it!
>
>                 Ned

Thank you Ned.
I've updated the document.

Alexey