IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Thu, 10 December 2015 18:25 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@elandsys.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 68DAE1AC3E0; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:25:04 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.8
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, T_DKIM_INVALID=0.01, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no
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 n2ewKp-wCyrH; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:25:03 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 243781AC3DF; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:24:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.226.210.92]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tBAIOSSw015785 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:24:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1449771882; x=1449858282; bh=sQg19Z43aN1xetDetEvkkJDmPp0CstGOP2sC5IjbRE4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=cPKerhlde//S2FrJemXmdN3LtfVKuRGSaUMBWGzoXXEg/gmWRlltRQk8JYDAic8ti UKD0m+a324EJQlpfQbus/LdY7lr68NKyPibjiGCHL/kbHAzwcspAvHDnA5uCAJgo9/ ppYKzbSk7Uvz6O5pzj6rPG2uEHkjERST8nxiG0hI=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1449771882; x=1449858282; i=@elandsys.com; bh=sQg19Z43aN1xetDetEvkkJDmPp0CstGOP2sC5IjbRE4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=PAxy6iD2i8gaSbThBOlWbdqOP8QwZstTnKbD7Z2zbJ7W9xleu0b8SadxgwIWItkLn PzRTCe1NmsXAlIX8SSlk+FjW1NeAjb1vdXLJbdn2UPcXdjdEje3YdBiHgts1t1Ay/3 3bJKpnRXfdpAMCVyZ6Xz2Ff3hu3FPVVgGNfiUmYk=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20151210101014.11999820@elandnews.com>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 10:24:15 -0800
To: Naren <narendrasingh.bisht@gmail.com>, imapext@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHC+rVEoexsnruY_uAY7t_S4z3PQs6ff8aX7x=48g==98pU4Vg@mail.g mail.com>
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>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/imapext/bGQyYsddaYTwuhz8IZJ4W5sSKb4>
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: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:25:04 -0000

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?

   (ii) What are the disadvantages of advertising the upload limit before the
        user has logged in?

Regards,
S. Moonesamy

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email