Re: draft-nerenberg-imap-channel-00.txt

>>>>> "Steve" == Steve Gardell <[email protected]> writes:

    Steve> I followed the link that Lyndon posted to ietf-imapext
    Steve> mailing list to this list for discussions of streaming. A
    Steve> quick (maybe too quick) scan of the archive didn't turn up
    Steve> any discussion of this draft. So hopefully I am not
    Steve> treading on a well-beaten path.

Actually, there hasn't been any discussion to date, and I was
just about to ping this list to see if anyone had any comments.

At the last IETF we had a brief discussion about the draft, with the
initial outstanding issue being the semantics of the URIs. The VPIM
folks were going to stew that over and come back with their
thoughts. Glenn, have you heard any further discussion on this? London
approaches, and I would like to get another rev of the draft out that
better describes the URI semantics.

We should also start thinking about whether we want to meet in London
to talk about moving this forward.  I haven't heard yet if the IMAP
Extensions group is meeting, so I think we can just plan for a
pub-BOF. (I can't think of any reason we would need to consume IMAPext
WG time, anyway.)

Can we have a show of hands from those who want to meet and
discuss in the pub during the London IETF?

--lyndon