Re: Review for first draft for draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension

Thanks Jay. A few comments.

Section 3.2: This section seems to imply that the extended list syntax for
STATUS APPENDLIMIT must be supported by any server that advertises the
APPENDLIMIT capability, regardless of whether it supports LIST-EXTENDED and
LIST-STATUS. I think we should clarify that this section will only apply to
servers that support LIST-EXTENDED, LIST-STATUS, and APPENDLIMIT.
Supporting the new syntax might be non-trivial, and will be wasted work for
servers that don't support per-mailbox limits (see below).

Mailbox-specific appendlimits: Our server will have a single appendlimit
for all mailboxes, so we don't need the per-mailbox limits. However, the
only way for a client to determine this will be to issue a SELECT or
extended LIST on the target mailbox and note the absence of a per-mailbox
appendlimit response. SELECT is expensive, and not all servers support
extended list. Is there a way we could annotate the APPENDLIMIT capability
to indicate that per-mailbox limits are not supported, so clients needn't
bother querying them? It could be something as simple as adding a magic
atom-char like '+' or '!':

APPENDLIMIT=25000000!   ; system-wide append limit is 25000000, applies to
all mailboxes


On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 3:29 PM, Naren <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hello Working Group,
>
> We have published the first draft for
> *draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension.*
>
> Please review the draft and drop your comments.
>
> http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension/
>
> --
> Thanks & Regards
> -Naren
>
> _______________________________________________
> imapext mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext
>
>

_______________________________________________
imapext mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext