Re: Fwd: I-D Action: draft-melnikov-rfc2088bis-01.txt
Alexey Melnikov <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.imapext |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 18/12/2014 11:57, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: > On Wednesday, December 17, 2014 7:35:44 PM CEST, Alexey Melnikov wrote: >> I revived and updated LITERAL+ extension. I also added LITERAL- >> extension (same as LITERAL+, but disallowed in APPEND). > Why is LITERAL- like that intead of being restricted to short > literals? Say up to 16k. Allowing smaller non synchronizing literal sizes in APPEND might work, but the problem is that this still allows for abuse if the limit is exceeded. Are people interested in changing LITERAL- to allow smaller messages being uploaded with non synchronizing literals (bigger messages can still be uploaded using RFC 3501 synchronizing literals)? > The problem in RFC 1047 affects APPEND too. A limit comparable to > typical TCP transmission windows would be appropriate, I think. _______________________________________________ imapext mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext