Re: Review of draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-03

Hi Jay,
At 15:13 07-10-2015, Jayantheesh S B wrote:
>Please find the response inline.


>"must be fast" is subjective.  I suggest rewriting the sentence 
>without RFC 2119 key words if we do not want to encourage debates 
>about "fast". :-)
>
>[Jay] Changed this sentence. Please refer the latest version of the document.

This is what you have in -04:

   "STATUS APPENDLIMIT should be fast and there ..."

Would you be okay with removing the "should" so that it does not 
sound like a recommendation?

In Section 2:

   "In this case the client should get APPENDLIMIT value by issuing
    STATUS or LIST command."

Is the "should" a RFC 2119 recommendation?

Thanks for adding text to the Security Considerations Section.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy 

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