IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [imapext] AD review draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-06

S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com> Thu, 17 December 2015 21:20 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 A75781B30B8 for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:20:05 -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 a05RJjuGiUaq for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:20:04 -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 BD18A1A8A82 for <imapext@ietf.org>; Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:20:04 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.226.211.226]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id tBHLJo5U024694 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:20:01 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1450387203; x=1450473603; bh=1/qAhHsTjzEnUB5G1ctKfdgWSXPThZQjtc+tJF2e52A=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=2WecLxbPt5kwbXWSuSuYz3OSKia+jX9qdct1pRLsgf/iKFcG1erFAbOM2LoPiVChp FgK8yCv5KXc+OtVmLN95uoVBrCNuIaQ5oQ5yCL4KLUQsON+lLLW8cv4pm9YdCnedIC sJRRoIjX4LJCeyKGNGuMsFo3aigihkeQbSBMSG5s=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1450387203; x=1450473603; i=@elandsys.com; bh=1/qAhHsTjzEnUB5G1ctKfdgWSXPThZQjtc+tJF2e52A=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Cc:In-Reply-To:References; b=gZWdMJDyfNJaAujqR+0W+oCWRWe/xf/f7YwQF+NtRKnNRhrShc/lgT4rzwHSATAik kJ/96gv74nkooFiC6y1rZKHpVnb5eYMF6vALFp2XrGOLGch9ZbInwjtm2kCAM+COi7 pWg2bBYZ29WZexjIR2HvHwEIlr/KYtZO4SCb6quw=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20151217130638.0d436848@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2015 13:19:25 -0800
To: Stu Brandt <stuart.brandt@teamaol.com>, imapext@ietf.org
From: S Moonesamy <sm+ietf@elandsys.com>
In-Reply-To: <5672F2BE.8060404@teamaol.com>
References: <emcf7f771e-a84b-4df3-b9ff-06dd5417a655@bodybag> <5A5084CC-6733-45DB-B3D5-4F73285257D0@isode.com> <6679218db47f443794b1ce28452623eb@SEAMBX07.sea.samsung.com> <5672EEDE.5060101@isode.com> <5672F2BE.8060404@teamaol.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/imapext/csweCJtFg8ID0r2ieMlzQ8xN2p4>
Cc: Jayantheesh S B <j.sb@sea.samsung.com>, Narendra Bisht <ns.bisht@sea.samsung.com>
Subject: Re: [imapext] AD review draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-06
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, 17 Dec 2015 21:20:05 -0000

Hi Stu,
At 09:37 17-12-2015, Stu Brandt wrote:
>Since RFC 3501 section 4.5 states...
>
>    The special form "NIL" represents the non-existence of a particular
>    data item that is represented as a string or parenthesized list, as
>    distinct from the empty string "" or the empty parenthesized list ().
>
>
>...does the introduction of nil as an alternative to number now 
>imply that an update to this text is necessary?

Thanks for flagging this.

I don't think so as it is ABNF in 
draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension which will be 
followed.  The following persons are in favor of using "NIL" [1][2][3][4]:

   Barry Leiba (Area Director)
   Bron Gondwana
   Adrien de Croy
   Alexey Melnikov

I suggest going ahead with that.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy (as document shepherd)

1. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imapext/current/msg05682.html
2. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imapext/current/msg05681.html
3. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imapext/current/msg05683.html
4. http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imapext/current/msg05684.html

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email