Re: Review - draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-05

Hi Alexey,

Thanks for your response. 

As you mentioned, we will add few words about the benefits of IMAP Server as well.

Regards,
Jay
-----Original Message-----
From: Alexey Melnikov [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2015 1:05 PM
To: S Moonesamy; [email protected]
Cc: Jayantheesh S B; Narendra Singh Bisht
Subject: Re: [imapext] Review - draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-05

On 11/11/2015 15:32, S Moonesamy wrote:
> Hello,
> At 13:48 03-11-2015, Jayantheesh S B wrote:
>> We have addressed all the review comments as part of 
>> draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-05.
>>
>> As well we have discussed all the issues and the solution in detail.  
>> Shall we take this draft to next stage?
>
> I'll comment about the discussion of
> draft-ietf-imapapnd-appendlimit-extension-05 [1].  The following 
> comment from Arnt Gulbrandsen caught my attention [2]: "IMO the 
> document should answer this particular question".  Arnt was referring 
> to the question from Timo Sirainen [3]: "Why implement something that 
> going to be a problem in only some very rare cases?"  There was a 
> message from Stu Brandt in which he mentioned that there is an 
> implementation [4].  There was another comment from Arnt: "Make it 
> seem as if the value of the implementation exceeds the effort to 
> implement"  [5].  Adrien de Croy mentioned that: "At the moment for us 
> appendlimit looks to have negative value overall, and we don't plan to 
> implement" [6].  There was a comment from Jayantheesh about the using 
> this extension in cases where the user attaches a big file and save 
> the mail to their Drafts folder [7].  I view the "unnecessary resource 
> usage" in the Introduction Section as a way to answer to the question.  
> Would that convince people to implement this extension?
>
> On one hand there is a part of this working group is not convinced 
> that it is worthwhile to implement this extension.  On the other hand, 
> there is an implementation and another part of this working group is 
> okay with the draft.  In my opinion, there is rough consensus on this 
> draft.
Agreed. I think we could add a paragraph explaining a bit more how this might help IMAP servers (currently the document only talks about benefits to IMAP clients) to make the document slightly better, but there are enough people who want to implement this extension anyway.

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