IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [imapext] Proposal for a new IMAP Working Group to revise CONDSTORE & QRESYNC

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Tue, 05 March 2013 19:09 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82F6E11E812C for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:09:46 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 8uymX7i+zEf3 for <imapext@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:09:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from waldorf.isode.com (cl-125.lon-03.gb.sixxs.net [IPv6:2a00:14f0:e000:7c::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E58711E812A for <imapext@ietf.org>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 11:09:39 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1362510578; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=U/x3KBv3lkxWKoMExuzVbeamYkijS1wrE8YTg+CYVx0=; 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=uoMpqnJllrV8S5YS1rDjnTIW28hhZzgmPOSSGJjIQBKnKjVs35s10dXQ6M5r6xgWL6Pexx ZhB8FKPPEogg46hE1js9iRP915xiZ9Qz2VUdfG03jjlLZZg12SAtvTwB08ANn8qGZlTU/y sp1tX2RpQTtfVzwBvm+G965eLtb59p8=;
Received: from [172.16.1.29] (shiny.isode.com [62.3.217.250]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <UTZC8gBtn0uc@waldorf.isode.com>; Tue, 5 Mar 2013 19:09:38 +0000
Message-ID: <513642F3.3080904@isode.com>
Date: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:09:39 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.0.1
To: Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi>
References: <513607D5.4090808@isode.com> <211A410D-C67D-4FF6-AACB-4007F75F7148@iki.fi>
In-Reply-To: <211A410D-C67D-4FF6-AACB-4007F75F7148@iki.fi>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "imapext@ietf.org" <imapext@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [imapext] Proposal for a new IMAP Working Group to revise CONDSTORE & QRESYNC
X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/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: Tue, 05 Mar 2013 19:09:46 -0000

On 05/03/2013 19:01, Timo Sirainen wrote:
> On 5.3.2013, at 16.57, Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> wrote:
>
>> I've noticed some surge in activity related to implementing CONDSTORE (RFC 4551)/QRESYNC (RFC 5162) in both clients and servers, so I drafted a new WG charter proposal to update/clarify these:
> ..
>> So please comment on whether you think this work is worth doing and on the proposed charter text.
> Can we keep it on this mailing list? I've too many mailing lists already. :)
If our ADs are agreeable, the idea is to reuse imapext@ietf.org.
>> I've also posted a new version of RFC 5162bis (http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-melnikov-5162bis-01), which addressed most (but not all) of existing errata on the document. If a new WG is to be formed, I propose that the document is used as one of the initial documents.
> Sounds like a good idea. I didn't read it yet, but some QRESYNC/CONDSTORE things that come to my mind:
All good questions, a couple of quick comments:
>   - command length limits as discussed by Michael
>   - don't allow server to send VANISHED duplicates
I think I dealt with this in the most recent draft. But yes, this needs 
to be fixed.
>   - algorithm how server uses the seq/uid mapping could be better to reduce how much data to send (I was planning on thinking this through but never got around to it)
>   - \recent flag changes highestmodseq?
No.
> probably nobody cares and makes it more difficult for server.
>   - condstore: is anyone really using per-flag modseq counters?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email