IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [MORG] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6154 (5581)

Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org> Fri, 21 December 2018 16:25 UTC

Return-Path: <barryleiba@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: morg@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: morg@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D8F93130E35 for <morg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:25:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 AC8B5A_R0Id5 for <morg@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:25:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-it1-f179.google.com (mail-it1-f179.google.com [209.85.166.179]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 42C1C130E34 for <morg@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:25:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-it1-f179.google.com with SMTP id i145so7599924ita.4 for <morg@ietf.org>; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:25:48 -0800 (PST)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=gTurZHHLoLvwCfCFB0d7GtTBoRNz45xqG5r2Dlkdhw0=; b=qaXxSC6KxwbtW2ec1mckZhilm1niph/0gYrx9qVXxgcRrn0NaJk1FfDwsnzAw2QX9L EEEcCQFR/+RFfptLzn2H/gPcFk4mss/dYj3QD4CNgeivGaEN8J+t4NwFfHq2gWZmZ6PU TIvIbrfnrAlNCpoKZznIBIAWy6xhfwAxeQGfVYKziiM2mYBdJ3hfWINvaTfSCix0KLjv MSPogMgrNkZ+rgOZS5jLZEr2rA3putPbD+sTPuq6U2lFSVoaLlrJV8+yvrqJpPF50SW6 yHkxWe+GnIebEZubVigU8d9RBU3aHKrb+dSviadZNCtb2Jry4Zbo/ubogcgMg0M0OAyM dzYQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AA+aEWaA7pByc+/KwB82FHD9gh0r0yztAFc7n09XhN3JB2WmpMFecQH7 yE5J608wt3mKS8qZjeip7AK+pQul+siA1el0zTU=
X-Google-Smtp-Source: AFSGD/W46AtDw0WtkKedC2xZrO4t2uew+71QobKDfvabkZc79DBXbquhhjaJucOe7Ppo/9w70bMUhuTCFqbOAZ+n3PQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a24:a04:: with SMTP id 4mr2364625itw.122.1545409547211; Fri, 21 Dec 2018 08:25:47 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20181221160018.06A80B81C58@rfc-editor.org>
In-Reply-To: <20181221160018.06A80B81C58@rfc-editor.org>
From: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 11:25:36 -0500
Message-ID: <CALaySJ+q3d+_SQcAVcxTYqc-GxteFO5R+PF+1ETK29m2uERj2A@mail.gmail.com>
To: RFC Errata System <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>
Cc: "Jamie Nicolson (倪志明)" <nicolson@google.com>, Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>, Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm>, Adam Roach <adam@nostrum.com>, Timo Sirainen <tss@iki.fi>, contact@emersion.fr, morg <morg@ietf.org>, Randall Gellens <randy@pensive.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/morg/5RQeMt82W-5-UuNTcQ_hpqjybSs>
Subject: Re: [MORG] [Technical Errata Reported] RFC6154 (5581)
X-BeenThere: morg@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Messaging Organization <morg.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/morg>, <mailto:morg-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/morg/>
List-Post: <mailto:morg@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:morg-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/morg>, <mailto:morg-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2018 16:25:52 -0000

I believe that Section 2 makes it clear that it works both ways: the
first paragraph says how special-use behave with non-extended LIST,
and the second paragraph says what it does with extended LIST.

Errata reporter, when you re-read those two paragraphs do you still
think it's unclear?

Barry

On Fri, Dec 21, 2018 at 11:00 AM RFC Errata System
<rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org> wrote:
>
> The following errata report has been submitted for RFC6154,
> "IMAP LIST Extension for Special-Use Mailboxes".
>
> --------------------------------------
> You may review the report below and at:
> http://www.rfc-editor.org/errata/eid5581
>
> --------------------------------------
> Type: Technical
> Reported by: Not clear whether SPECIAL-USE implies LIST-EXTENDED <contact@emersion.fr>
>
> Section: 5.2
>
> Original Text
> -------------
>
>      C: t1 CAPABILITY
>      S: * CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 SPECIAL-USE
>      S: t1 OK done
>
> Corrected Text
> --------------
>
>      C: t1 CAPABILITY
>      S: * CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 SPECIAL-USE LIST-EXTENDED
>      S: t1 OK done
>
> Notes
> -----
> Is it okay for a server to support SPECIAL-USE without supporting LIST-EXTENDED? The example seems to imply this, but it's not clear from the RFC text. Section 2 starts with: "For the extended list command [RFC5258]", but doesn't say the server MUST support LIST-EXTENDED.
>
> Instructions:
> -------------
> This erratum is currently posted as "Reported". If necessary, please
> use "Reply All" to discuss whether it should be verified or
> rejected. When a decision is reached, the verifying party
> can log in to change the status and edit the report, if necessary.
>
> --------------------------------------
> RFC6154 (draft-ietf-morg-list-specialuse-06)
> --------------------------------------
> Title               : IMAP LIST Extension for Special-Use Mailboxes
> Publication Date    : March 2011
> Author(s)           : B. Leiba, J. Nicolson
> Category            : PROPOSED STANDARD
> Source              : Message Organization
> Area                : Applications
> Stream              : IETF
> Verifying Party     : IESG

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email