Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA23080 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (ph18@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA23076 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:12:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:50:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Pete Resnick cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:13:14 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: > I believe allowing the server to ignore the issue is the moral > equivalent of encouraging the clients of building its own equivalence > classes. I don't think so. There is not today a lot of UTF-8 mail flowing around, and IMAP is certainly not the only protocol that is obliged to wrestle with this issue. I don't see any reason why IMAP (and especially not IMAP REGEX) should take the lead, particularly given no guarantee that other protocols will follow that lead. Since it is not an issue specific to REGEX, and instead affects SEARCH, SORT, and THREAD as well; I recommend that action be deferred to a specification on IMAP i18n. > Like I said, I don't care if we just say "Thou shalt do > fully composed", but I think we've got to say something. How can we say such a thing? We could do that for string arguments to IMAP commands, but we can't control what gets sent in 822/SMTP. I *think* that most people do fully-composed today. I know that I convert the ISO-8859-1 character 0xe4 (German umlaut-a) to U+00e4 and not U+0061 U+0308. I'm not sure that we can guarantee that everybody will do that. Also, do we have a guarantee that Unicode isn't going to add any more composed characters? I recall that Unicode is unwilling to do so, but is that an absolute prohibition? If we don't have an absolute prohibition, that means that "fully composed" today can differ from "fully composed" tommorrow. I really think that we need a separate IMAP i18n BCP. Here's another reason. As far as I can tell, Cyrus ignores combining characters entirely; that is, U+00e4 is canonicalized to U+0061 (and hence matches U+0041 too). I don't think that this is right, but arguably it's better than my server's failure to match U+00e4 as equivalent to U+0041 U+0308. I think that we need a definite ruling resolving this. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA20910 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme-software.com (presnick-fw.flexabit.net [64.198.230.34]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20905 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from presnick-35.flexabit.net (64.198.230.35) by episteme-software.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.2a2); Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:12:56 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: resnick@resnick1.qualcomm.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 5.0b25-09.00] Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:13:14 -0500 To: Mark Crispin From: Pete Resnick Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On 10/23/00 at 10:37 AM -0700, Mark Crispin wrote: >On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:28 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >>I.e. the client can build its own equivelence classes using >>grouping and logical OR. > >I can just envison a client author getting a maniacal gleam in his eye upon >hearing this! It may not be too bad if you stick to your own language (the >Koreans may think otherwise). But I don't think that anyone would be happy >being told this. > >I agree with Pete that if composed characters are done, it should be in the >server, not the client. However, I disagree with him in that I believe that >we must allow a server to ignore the issue. I believe allowing the server to ignore the issue is the moral equivalent of encouraging the clients of building its own equivalence classes. Like I said, I don't care if we just say "Thou shalt do fully composed", but I think we've got to say something. pr -- Pete Resnick Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA20338 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (wafan@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA20334 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:37:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: Pete Resnick , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:28 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that > > composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. > Well, if the feeling is that servers should just punt on this for now, > can we leave it up to the client to handle this? I.e. the client can build > its own equivelence classes using grouping and logical OR. I can just envison a client author getting a maniacal gleam in his eye upon hearing this! It may not be too bad if you stick to your own language (the Koreans may think otherwise). But I don't think that anyone would be happy being told this. I agree with Pete that if composed characters are done, it should be in the server, not the client. However, I disagree with him in that I believe that we must allow a server to ignore the issue. Otherwise, we create an excessive barrier to implementation. Remember, it's not just decomposition, it's also canonical ordering. Decomposition could be done by a (big) table lookup; canonical ordering requires code. Character composition is not just a REGEX issue. It's an issue with SEARCH, SORT, and THREAD as well. This strongly indicates to me that REGEX should punt this to a separate IMAP-i18n BCP specification. Who knows. The IETF may decide upon a BCP for canonical representation of Unicode strings, and mandate that application protocols can assume that all Unicode strings are already in this canonical form (so the "punt" was right). [No, I'm not holding my breath. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA19390 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA19386 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:21:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9NHQSk00667; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:28 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: Pete Resnick cc: Mark Crispin , ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: > This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that > composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. We > can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode > comparison TR (is it published yet?), or make some attempt to specify > whether you compare maximally composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. > I am agnostic about which of the latter two we choose. Well, if the feeling is that servers should just punt on this for now, can we leave it up to the client to handle this? I.e. the client can build its own equivelence classes using grouping and logical OR. One could argue that the client has the best information on the user's overall language environment, and therefore is in the best position to define equivalences. --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA14149 for ietf-imapext-bks; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:17:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com [155.208.254.68]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA14141 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpopd.pwd.hp.com (hpopd.pwd.hp.com [15.145.205.59]) by bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05CFC1CE05; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:22:14 +0200 (METDST) Received: from pwd.hp.com (IDENT:jch@ilex.pwd.hp.com [15.145.204.106]) by hpopd.pwd.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3 SMKit7.01 OpenMail) with ESMTP id KAA09301; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:22:13 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <39EC1A44.2A03E00C@pwd.hp.com> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:22:12 +0100 From: John Haxby Organization: OpenMail R&D X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test9 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin Cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 References: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mark Crispin wrote: > [...] Note as well that "alnum" > and "alpha" are hopelessly west-Europe specific. You're far more likely to be right in this regard than I am, but I thought that [:alpha:] was defined as those (unicode) characters that are letters, that would include á (a-acute), æ (ae-ligature) and Japanese ideograms and phonetic symbols, but exclude £ (sterling), for example. This is taken from the implementation of character classes in Tcl 8.3 which, so far as I know, uses standard (16bit) unicode tables. jch --------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="jch.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for John Haxby Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="jch.vcf" begin:vcard n:Haxby;John tel;fax:+44 1344 763686 tel;work:+44 1344 763711 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:https://ecardfile.com/id/jch org:OpenMail R&D adr:;;Nine Mile Ride;Wokingham;Berks;RG40 3LL;England version:2.1 email;internet:john_haxby@hp.com note: x-mozilla-cpt:;-18560 fn:John Haxby end:vcard --------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026-- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA08637 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:35:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (SMTP5.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.85]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA08633 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from penguin.andrew.cmu.edu (PENGUIN.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.122.2]) (authenticated as leg with KERBEROS_V4 (56 bits)) by smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9H5drG03498; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:39:54 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:39:54 -0400 Message-Id: <200010170539.e9H5drG03498@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> From: Lawrence Greenfield X-Mailer: BatIMail version 3.2 To: ietf-imapext@imc.org, Lyndon Nerenberg In-reply-to: Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:14:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg When searching against the BODY, the anchors match the start and end of individual text lines. In the absence of an anchor should a wildcard match across line boundaries? I think it should, since it is possible to constrain a match within a single line through the use of anchors if that behaviour is desired. However unconstrained searches could exhaust the resources of an implementation (e.g., 'SEARCH REGEXP BODY "a.*a"' against a 200 Mbyte message that happens to start and end with the character 'a'). We could allow these to fail (NO) with a specific response code. [If we allow bounded repetitions then it would be possible to constrain the match to be within a certain number of characters. I doubt it's worth the added complexity.] Regular expressions take constant space to match, since they're equivalent to DFAs. (Well, standard regular expressions; Perl regular expressions aren't really regular expressions and can be arbitrarily complex to evaluate.) All halfway decent implementations sue constant space; this shouldn't be a concern. Larry Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA02904 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:48:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.17] (ip17.proper.com [165.227.249.17]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA02898; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:48:41 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:53:41 -0700 To: Pete Resnick , Mark Crispin From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: At 6:01 PM -0500 10/16/00, Pete Resnick wrote: >We can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode >comparison TR (is it published yet?), No. It is published (UTS 6), but it only gives a framework for comparisons. You then have to specify your local collation hooks. In other words, don't even think about it. > or make some attempt to specify whether you compare maximally >composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. I am agnostic about which of >the latter two we choose. If you go this route, you should follow UAX 15 and choose form C. It makes much more sense than decomposed, for the reasons that they give in the document. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA02581 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout2.cac.washington.edu (mxout2.cac.washington.edu [140.142.33.4]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA02573 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:36:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout2.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id SAA07400; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:41:52 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (bill@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id SAA30779; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:41:52 -0700 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:18:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Pete Resnick cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:01:38 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: > This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that > composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. That's correct. That's the status quo for IMAP searches. > We > can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode > comparison TR (is it published yet?), or make some attempt to specify > whether you compare maximally composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. > I am agnostic about which of the latter two we choose. Careful. Refer to section 3.9 of the Unicode Standard to see what this entails, paying particular attention to the text about combining classes and canonical ordering. UW doesn't do anything with composed vs. decomposed characters. Cyrus flushes combining diacritical marks (right for some languages, wrong for others). Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA28479 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme-software.com (presnick-fw.flexabit.net [64.198.230.34]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA28475 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from presnick-35.flexabit.net (64.198.230.35) by episteme-software.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.2a2); Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:01:24 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: resnick@resnick1.qualcomm.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 5.0b25-09.00] Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:01:38 -0500 To: Mark Crispin From: Pete Resnick Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On 10/16/00 at 3:02 PM -0700, Mark Crispin wrote: > All other characters are compared > according to their octet values, as expressed in UTF-8. No attempt > is made to treat composed characters specially, or to do > case-insensitive comparisons of composed characters. This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. We can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode comparison TR (is it published yet?), or make some attempt to specify whether you compare maximally composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. I am agnostic about which of the latter two we choose. pr -- Pete Resnick Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA27798 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (groves@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA27794 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:02:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 16:01:48 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Okay, I'm convinced. Let's leave classes out. We can deal with it if/when > LANGUAGE ever resolves itself. I thought that would be the outcome! :-) That probably also means punting on ranges outside of ASCII. A way to avoid this would be to declare that the REGEX strings must be UTF-8, and require that non-ASCII ranges be interpreted according to Unicode. Otherwise, you need charset-dependent interpretation of the regex strings in order to interpret the ranges correctly, and character-dependent range checking of the strings being searched. Many (most? all?) IMAP servers that do multi-charset searching implement it by canonicalizing everything into UTF-8, and then doing the search. Server implementors would probably want to do the same for REGEX, but we can't if we have to preserve charset-specific ranging. The easiest punt is to say "octets". There's also precedent (some would say dishonorable precedent). This takes advantage of the fact that, unlike most other multi-byte encodings, an octet search will work correctly for UTF-8. The downside is that this adds to the list of i18n problems that LANGUAGE (or whatever) has to solve. There is a possibility that server implementors will be faced with a choice of REGEX or i18n but not both. We'll need an i18n considerations section to outline the decisions. Suggest something like the following, which is hacked from the SORT and THREAD documents: Internationalization Considerations By default, strings are compared according to the "minimum comparison algorithm". All implementations of REGEX MUST implement the minimum comparison algorithm. In the minimum comparison algorithm, the Basic Latin alphabetics (U+0041 to U+005A uppercase, U+0061 to U+007A lowercase) are compared in a case-insensitive fashion; that is, "A" (U+0041) and "a" (U+0061) are treated as exact equals. All other characters are compared according to their octet values, as expressed in UTF-8. No attempt is made to treat composed characters specially, or to do case-insensitive comparisons of composed characters. Note: this means, among other things, that the composed characters in the Latin-1 Supplement are not compared in what would be considered an ISO 8859-1 "case-insensitive" fashion. Case comparison rules for characters with diacriticals differ between languages; the minimum comparison does not attempt to deal with this at all. This is reserved for other comparons, which may be language-specific. Other comparisons, and the ability to change the comparison, will be defined in a separate document dealing with IMAP internationalization. It is anticipated that there will be a generic Unicode comparison, which will provide generic case-insensitivity for alphabetic scripts, specification of composed character handling, and language-specific comparison. A server which implements non-default comparisons will modify its comparison behavior according to the selected comparison. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA27447 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:57:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA27443 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9GM1mE01230; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 16:01:48 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 16:01:48 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: Mark Crispin cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Okay, I'm convinced. Let's leave classes out. We can deal with it if/when LANGUAGE ever resolves itself. --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA26924 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (rodriguez@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA26919 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:23:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:33 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Since the classes are simple aliases we could certainly live without > them. However the representation of classes is useful enough that I would > prefer to have the semantics well defined on the server side rather than > being a black-box in the client. OK, so far as that goes... > I also think it's much more likely that > we'll see a greater range of charsets and locales being made available if > it's a server-side implementation. That means that REGEX needs to define what is meant by a "character". It is definitely not what IMAP calls a "CHAR" or a "CHAR8", since these are tied to a single octet. Defining character as "Unicode character" may be better, but then we get into questions of equivalent sequences including precomposed characters (refer to page 2-9 of the Unicode standard). How deeply do we go down this rathole? Remember, the existing IMAP search didn't solve this problem. It dodged it. But you're standing right out in the line of fire when you start mentioning charsets and locales. > (My rationale here is that POSIX > mandates a minimum set of character classes, and servers are likely to be > implemented in a POSIX environment, thus the functionality will already be > available.) There's a danger here; implementors may be tempted to call the local C library implementation of recmp() rather than implementing according to the specification. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA26307 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:13:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA26302 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:13:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9GLIXE01017; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:33 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:33 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: Mark Crispin cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Mark Crispin wrote: > Lyndon's comment about character classes frightens me. Classes are not in the > current draft. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be, but there are some big > pitfalls from going there. They're not just charset-specific, they're also > language-specific and perhaps also locale-specific. Note as well that "alnum" > and "alpha" are hopelessly west-Europe specific. Since the classes are simple aliases we could certainly live without them. However the representation of classes is useful enough that I would prefer to have the semantics well defined on the server side rather than being a black-box in the client. I also think it's much more likely that we'll see a greater range of charsets and locales being made available if it's a server-side implementation. (My rationale here is that POSIX mandates a minimum set of character classes, and servers are likely to be implemented in a POSIX environment, thus the functionality will already be available.) --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA24549 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (gibb@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24540 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:19:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:06:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: I agree with most of Lyndon's comments, particularly the ones about how it must be possible to fully implement REGEXP using only the RFC and his suggestion for a single REGEXP qualifier to switch the interpretation of all astrings in the search. Lyndon's comment about character classes frightens me. Classes are not in the current draft. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be, but there are some big pitfalls from going there. They're not just charset-specific, they're also language-specific and perhaps also locale-specific. Note as well that "alnum" and "alpha" are hopelessly west-Europe specific. I also suggest that the "a.*a" problem get examined carefully. Individual implementors should not be obliged to guess and hope that they guess right. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA22327 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 12:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA22323 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 12:09:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9GJEAE00791 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:14:18 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:14:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: GENERAL ------- The terms REGEX and REGEXP are used inconsistently. We need to support POSIX extended regexps for grouping and logical OR. The presumption is that regexp searches continue to be case- insensitive. This should be called out explicitly so there is no confusion. We need to call out that character ranges ([a-z]) are in the context of the current charset. An implementation MUST fail a REGEXP search with a range ([a-z]) or class ([:alpha:]) if it cannot interpret these within the context of the current charset. [NO with [BADCHARSET] as proposed in Mark's imapv draft? Or a seperate response code specific to REGEXP not being able to handle the character class within the context of the charset? Or do we mandate that supporting a charset in the presence of REGEXP requires that the classes be fully supported in order to advertise that charset? There's an potential ambiguity here in the failure modes for SEARCH vs. SEARCH REGEXP. ] Which classes do we support? I think the minimum useful set is: alnum, alpha, digit, space. [Are graph and punct useful here?] REGEXP SYNTAX ------------- The syntax should be that of POSIX regular expressions with the following exceptions: * no backtracking * no bounded repetitions * no equivalence classes Character classes MUST be interpreted in the context of the current charset. The syntax and behaviour of the regexps needs to be called out explicitly in the RFC. There are ambiguities in the POSIX spec that must be clarified in the RFC. We cannot reference a POSIX spec. It must be possible to fully implement REGEXP using only the RFC. How do we specify the syntax of regexp's in the RFC? Ditto for the behaviour of the regexp's. The syntax can probably be represented in the ABNF, however the semantics will require prose. IMAP SYNTAX ----------- Rather than modifying I would prefer to modify itself: search ::= "SEARCH" SPACE ["CHARSET" SPACE astring SPACE] ["REGEXP" SPACE] 1#search_key ;; [CHARSET] MUST be registered with IANA REGEXP switches the interpretation of all in the syntax to be regexps. It eliminates the "sillyness" described in section 4 of the draft. Any existing (RFC2060) can be represented as an REGEXP encoded . REGEXP ANCHORS -------------- To be useful, anchors need to be context sensitive. I would like to propose the following behaviour. In header fields, the anchors match the start and end of the contents of the header field-body, ignoring any newline folding. For example, given the header field: Subject: This is a line-wrapped subject header. SEARCH REGEXP SUBJECT "line-wrapped.*$" would match. SEARCH REGEXP SUBJECT "line-wrapped$" would NOT match. Note that [:space:] matches on CR, LF, and TAB, therefore the line-break in the header can be treated as whitespace. [Should the CRLF line termination in the multi-line header be visible for matching purposes? A folded header will always have an HT or SP following the CRLF.] When searching against the BODY, the anchors match the start and end of individual text lines. In the absence of an anchor should a wildcard match across line boundaries? I think it should, since it is possible to constrain a match within a single line through the use of anchors if that behaviour is desired. However unconstrained searches could exhaust the resources of an implementation (e.g., 'SEARCH REGEXP BODY "a.*a"' against a 200 Mbyte message that happens to start and end with the character 'a'). We could allow these to fail (NO) with a specific response code. [If we allow bounded repetitions then it would be possible to constrain the match to be within a certain number of characters. I doubt it's worth the added complexity.] --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA20281 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 01:26:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com [155.208.254.68]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA20263 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 01:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpopd.pwd.hp.com (hpopd.pwd.hp.com [15.145.205.59]) by bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB041BBCC; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:31:05 +0200 (METDST) Received: from pwd.hp.com (IDENT:jch@ilex.pwd.hp.com [15.145.204.106]) by hpopd.pwd.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3 SMKit7.01 OpenMail) with ESMTP id JAA15547; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:31:02 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <39EABCC2.BD2E4D27@pwd.hp.com> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:30:58 +0100 From: John Haxby Organization: OpenMail R&D X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test9 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin Cc: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY References: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mark Crispin wrote: > I am thinking about reducing the number of RTTs in a typical IMAP session. > Can anyone come up with a good reason why these should NOT be added to IMAP. > I don't believe that the time taken for the extra commands is significant compared to the time taken to create a new session; that is, it is dwarfed by the time taken to set up a new process, read in configuration settings, check authentication, etc etc. Have you, or anyone else, measured this and compared it to the time taken to turn around a CAPABILITY request? If you're concerned about turnaround time, then you should also state the underlying network latencies that you are assuming. jch --------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="jch.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for John Haxby Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="jch.vcf" begin:vcard n:Haxby;John tel;fax:+44 1344 763686 tel;work:+44 1344 763711 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:https://ecardfile.com/id/jch org:OpenMail R&D adr:;;Nine Mile Ride;Wokingham;Berks;RG40 3LL;England version:2.1 email;internet:john_haxby@hp.com note: x-mozilla-cpt:;-18560 fn:John Haxby end:vcard --------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF-- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA04425 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:21:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme-software.com (presnick-fw.flexabit.net [64.198.230.34]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA04421 for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from presnick-35.flexabit.net (64.198.230.35) by episteme-software.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.2a2); Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:15:53 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: resnick@resnick1.qualcomm.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 5.0b25-09.00] Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:16:03 -0500 To: Mark Crispin From: Pete Resnick Subject: Re: imapext list needs moderation Cc: IMAP Extensions WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On 10/15/00 at 11:01 AM -0700, Mark Crispin wrote: >At the very least, it needs to limit postings to list members. It's >getting really old to see the same pyramid scheme spam twice in under 24 >hours. I'd prefer moderation to limiting posting. I'll talk to Paul about it. pr -- Pete Resnick Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA02998 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.17] (ip17.proper.com [165.227.249.17]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA02993; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:23:24 -0700 To: Mark Crispin , IMAP Extensions WG From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: imapext list needs moderation Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: At 11:01 AM -0700 10/15/00, Mark Crispin wrote: >At the very least, it needs to limit postings to list members. It's >getting really old to see the same pyramid scheme spam twice in under 24 >hours. This is the mailing list for an IETF WG. As a rule, such mailing lists should only be moderated if there are too many off-topic postings (as determined by the WG chair) or the spam level is getting in the way of productive work. "Getting really old" doesn't qualify for the latter for me, but it might for others. If Pete wants me to make this a moderated list, I can do so, but I propose that people instead just put up with the minor amount of spam and use it as a lesson in the problems we still have to face in the Internet mail industry. Prediction: the number of messages talking about the spam problem on this list will quickly be larger than the number of spam messages on the list. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA02297 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:56:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (bcn@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA02293 for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:56:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:01:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin To: IMAP Extensions WG Subject: imapext list needs moderation Message-ID: Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: At the very least, it needs to limit postings to list members. It's getting really old to see the same pyramid scheme spam twice in under 24 hours. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA01196 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 09:43:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from edith.3dgrafika.cz (IDENT:root@[194.228.3.166]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA01185; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 09:43:41 -0700 (PDT) From: sst@bemberg.de Received: from oemcomputer (1Cust6.tnt1.chi1.da.uu.net [63.20.221.6]) by edith.3dgrafika.cz (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA18361; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 18:52:15 +0200 Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 18:52:15 +0200 Message-Id: <200010151652.SAA18361@edith.3dgrafika.cz> To: sst@bemberg.de Subject: Earn $50,000 in 90 Days! It Really Works! It worked so well the first time, I'm doing it again! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Dear Friend, You can earn $50,000 or more in next the 90 days sending e-mail. Seem impossible? Read on for details; is there a catch; NO, there is no catch, just send your emails and be on your way to financial freedom. "AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TELEVISION" Thank you for your time and Interest. This is the letter you've been reading about in the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program described below to see, if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are, absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results of this show have been truly remarkable. So many people are participating that those involved are doing, much better than ever before. Since everyone makes more as more people try it out, its been very exciting to be a part of lately. You will understand once you experience it. "HERE IT IS BELOW" ================================================ *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY LITTLE investment and the income return is TREMENDOUS!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into contact with people, do any hard work, and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dreams will come true. This Multi-level e-mail order marketing program works perfectly 100% EVERY TIME. E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non-commercialized method of advertising NOW! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of this action !!! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford Research and the Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold through multi-level methods by the mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the U.S., 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. You may have heard this story before, but over the summer Donald Trump made an appearance on the David Letterman show. Dave asked him what he would do if he lost everything and had to start over from scratch. Without hesitating, Trump said he would find a good network marketing company and get to work. The audience started to hoot and boo him. He looked out at the audience and dead-panned his response "That's why I'm sitting up here and you are all sitting out there!" With network marketing you have two sources of income. Direct commissions from sales you make yourself and commissions from sales made by people you introduce to the business. Residual income is the secret of the wealthy. It means investing time or money once and getting paid again and again and again. In network marketing, it also means getting paid for the work of others. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. My name is Jonathan Rourke. Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER FINANCIALLY!!! In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Six month's prior to receiving this program, I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I would make a million dollars in one year... it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it! But like I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT !!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further into debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. But like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT." Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, and because all of my orders are fulfilled via e-mail, the only expense is my time. I am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER!!! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and are if financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! Sincerely, Jonathan Rourke PS Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate...because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over 4 MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have several offices that make this and several other programs here and over seas. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on everyone of them! Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW! ************************************************************ "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Jody Jacobs, Richmond, VA ************************************************************ HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLAR$ INSTRUCTIONS: This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. Before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all multi-level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere: This is what you MUST do: 1. Order all 4 reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). * For each report, send $5.00 CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL AND ADDRESS, YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) and to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! * When you place your order, make sure you order each of the four reports. You will need all four reports so that you can save them on your computer and resell them. * Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. 2. IMPORTANT-- DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than is instructed below in steps "a" through "f" or you will lose out on the majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you'll also see how it doesn't work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter it, it will not work. a. Look below for the listing of available reports. b. After you've ordered the four reports, take this Advertisement and remove the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their $50,000! c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you copy every name and address ACCURATELY! 3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to the Instruction portion of this letter. Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $20). You obviously already have an Internet Connection and e-mail is FREE! To assist you with marketing your business on the internet, the 4 reports you purchase will provide you with invaluable marketing information which includes how to send bulk e-mails, where to find thousands of free classified ads and much, much more. There are two primary methods of building your downline: METHOD #1: SENDING BULK E-MAIL Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume you and all those involved send out only 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a 0.5% response. Using a good list the response could be much better. Also, many people will send out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 0.5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 0.5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The 0.5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The 0.5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 $5 bills for you. CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5,000+ $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF THE 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF 2,000. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practically nothing. You obviously already have an internet connection and e-mail is FREE !!! REPORT #2 will show you the best methods for bulk e-mailing, tell you where to obtain free bulk e-mail software and where to obtain e-mail lists. METHOD #2 - PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET 1. Advertising on the 'Net is very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get ONLY 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Follow this example to achieve the STAGGERING results below: 1st level-your 10 members with $5.........$50 2nd level-10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100).......$500 3rd level-10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000) $5,000 4th level-10 members from those 1,000 ($5 x 10k) $50,000 THIS TOTALS ---------------------------$55,550 Remember friends, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Most people get 100's of participants! THINK ABOUT IT! For every $5.00 you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the report they ordered. THAT'S IT! ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out, with YOUR name and address on it, will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! ------------------------------------------ AVAILABLE REPORTS ------------------------------------------ *** Order Each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME *** Notes: - ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH (U.S. CURRENCY) FOR EACH REPORT CHEQUES NOT ACCEPTED - ALWAYS SEND YOUR ORDER VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL - Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in at least two sheets of paper (IF NOT MORE SO THAT THE BILL CAN'T BE SEEN AGAINST LIGHT) - On one of those sheets of paper, include: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering, (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your name & postal address (as return address in case the post office encounters problems). PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THESE REPORTS NOW: ______________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "The Insider's Guide to Advertising for Free on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: Doug Teasdale 619 Hamilton unit C Costa Mesa, CA 92627 ______________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "The Insider's Guide to Sending Bulk E-mail on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: C.R. Kneeland %P.O. Box 94 Prather, CA 93651 ______________________________________________________ REPORT #3 "The Secrets to Multilevel Marketing on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: David Robinson 43000 W Nine Mile Rd Novi, MI 48375 ______________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "How to become a Millionaire utilizing the Power of Multilevel Marketing and the Internet" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Sam Laan Box 25362,395 Wellington Rd South London, ON Canada N6C 6B1 ______________________________________________________ About 50,000 new people get online every month! ******* TIPS FOR SUCCESS ******* * TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. * Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product/report. * ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. * Be patient and persistent with this program. If you follow the instructions exactly, your results WILL BE SUCCESSFUL! * ABOVE ALL, HAVE FAITH IN YOURSELF AND KNOW YOU WILL SUCCEED! ******* YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES ******* Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you don't receive 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT#2. If you don't, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash will continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. If you want to generate more income, send another batch of e-mails or continue placing ads and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! Before you make your decision as to whether or not you participate in this program. Please answer one question..... DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE YOUR LIFE? If the answer is yes, please look at the following facts about this program: 1. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT WHICH DOES NOT COST ANYTHING TO PRODUCE! 2. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT WHICH DOES NOT COST ANYTHING TO SHIP! 3. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT WHICH DOES NOT COST YOU ANYTHING TO ADVERTISE! 4. YOU ARE UTILIZING THE POWER OF THE INTERNET AND THE POWER OF MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING TO DISTRIBUTE YOUR PRODUCT ALL OVER THE WORLD! 5. YOUR ONLY EXPENSES OTHER THAN YOUR INITIAL $20 INVESTMENT IS YOUR TIME! 6. VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE INCOME YOU GENERATE FROM THIS PROGRAM IS PURE PROFIT! 7. THIS PROGRAM WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER. ******* T E S T I M O N I A L S ******* This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rule of not trying to place your name in a different position, it won't work and you'll lose a lot of potential income. I'm living proof that it works. It really is a great opportunity to make relatively easy money, with little cost to you. If you do choose to participate, follow the program exactly, and you'll be on your way to financial security. Steven Bardfield, Portland, OR ************************************************************ My name is Mitchell. My wife, Jody, and I live in Chicago, IL. I am a cost accountant with a major U.S. Corporation and I make pretty good money. When I received the program I grumbled to Jody about receiving "junk mail." I made fun of the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the population and percentages involved. I "knew" it wouldn't work. Jody totally ignored my supposed intelligence and jumped in with both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to lay the old "I told you so" on her when the thing didn't work... well, the laugh was on me! Within two weeks she had received over 50 responses. Within 45 days she had received over $147,200 in $5 bills! I was shocked! I was sure that I had it all figured and that it wouldn't work. I AM a believer now. I have joined Jody in her "hobby." I did have seven more years until retirement, but I think of the "rat race" and it's not for me. We owe it all to MLM. Mitchell Wolf MD., Chicago, IL ************************************************************ The main reason for this letter is to convince you that this system is honest, lawful, extremely profitable, and is a way to get a large amount of money in a short time. I was approached several times before I checked this out. I joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received $36,470.00 in the first 14 weeks, with money still coming in. Charles Morris, Esq. ************************************************************ Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservative that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at least get my money back. Boy, was I surprised when I found my medium-size post office box crammed with orders! For awhile, it got so overloaded that I had to start picking up my mail at the window. I'll make more money this year than any 10 years of my life before. The nice thing about this deal is that it doesn't matter where people live. There simply isn't a better investment with a faster return. Paige Willis, Des Moines, IA ************************************************************ I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to wait until I was e-mailed another program, .11 months passed then it came...I didn't delete this one!...I made more than $41,000 on the first try!! Violet Wilson, Johnstown, PA *********************************************************** This is my third time to participate in this plan. We have quit our jobs, and will soon buy a home on the beach and live off the interest on our money. The only way on earth that this plan will work for you is if you do it. For your sake, and for your family's sake don't pass up this golden opportunity. Good luck and happy spending! Kerry Ford, Centerport, NY ************************************************************ ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM! NOW IS THE TIME FOR YOUR TURN DECISIVE ACTION YIELDS POWERFUL RESULTS _______________________________________________________ FOR YOUR INFORMATION.... If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal agency) 1-(800)827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax requirements. If you have any question of the legality of this letter contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington DC. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA10703 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exchange_01.wilsondd.com (mail.wilsondd.com [62.172.104.90]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA10608; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:26:38 -0700 (PDT) From: paul@bourgeat.fr Message-Id: <200010150226.TAA10608@ns.secondary.com> Received: from alli (ip62.schiller-park9.il.pub-ip.psi.net [38.31.126.62]) by exchange_01.wilsondd.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id T8LV5HD0; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 03:25:32 +0100 To: paul@bourgeat.fr Subject: Truly Earn $50,000 in 90 Days! It Works! Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Dear Friend, This really works! Have the faith, don't miss this opportunity, get involved also, and it will work for you as it does for us!!!!! Thank you for your time and interest. This email contains the ENTIRE PLAN of how YOU can make $50,000 or more in the next 90 days simply sending email! Seem impossible? Just read on and see how easy this is.... Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program described below to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved that there are absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results have been truly remarkable. So many people are participating that those involved are doing much better than ever before. Since everyone makes more as more people try it out, its been very exciting. You will understand once you try it yourself! ********* THE ENTIRE PLAN IS HERE BELOW ********* *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read this program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY!! It does NOT require you to come into contact with people or make or take any telephone calls. Just follow the instructions, and you will make money. This simplified e-mail marketing program works perfectly 100% EVERY TIME! E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this virtually free method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using email. Get your piece of this action!!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hello - My name is Johnathon Rourke, I'm from Rhode Island. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. Two years ago, the corporation I worked for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life. I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this could change your life FOREVER. FINANCIALLY$$$!!! In mid December, I received this program in my e-mail. Six months prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work. But as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly. I couldn't believe my eyes! Here was a MONEY MAKING MACHINE I could start immediately without any debt. Like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL I decided "WHY NOT!?!??" Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don't need any for printing to send out the program, and because I also send the product (reports) by e-mail, my only expense is my time. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2. 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 10,000, received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car! Please take your time to read this plan, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER$!!! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work and you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and are in financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! $$ Sincerely, Johnathon Rourke ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to"move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have retired from the program after sending thousands and thousands of programs. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on everyone of them! Remember though, the more you send out, the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent. IT IS UP TO YOU!! NOW DO IT!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Before you delete this program from your in box, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. $$$ IT WORKS!!! $$$ Jody Jacobs Richmond, VA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLAR$$$$!!!! This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making business. As with all multi-level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we sell and deliver a product for EVERY dollar received. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the EASIEST marketing plan anywhere! It is simply order filling by email! ******************************************************************* The product is informational and instructional material, keys to the secrets for everyone on how to open the doors to the magic world of E-COMMERCE , the information highway, the wave of the future ! PLAN SUMMARY: (1) You order the 4 reports listed below ($5 each) They come to you by email. (2) Save a copy of this entire letter and put your name after Report #1 and move the other names down. (3) Via the internet, access Yahoo.com or any of the other major search engines to locate hundreds of bulk email service companies (search for "bulk email") and have them send 25,000 - 50,000 emails for you about $49+) (4) Orders will come to you by postal mail - simply email them the Report they ordered. Let me ask you - isn't this about as easy as it gets? ******************************************************************* By the way there are over 50 MILLION email addresses with millions more joining the internet each year so don't worry about "running out" or "saturation". People are used to seeing and hearing the same advertisements every day on radio/TV. How many times have you received the same pizza flyers on your door? Then one day you are hungry for pizza and you order one. Same thing with this letter. I received this letter many times - then one day I decided it was time to try it. ******************************************************************* YOU CAN START TODAY - JUST DO THESE EASY STEPS: STEP #1. ORDER THE FOUR REPORTS Order the four reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). -- For each report, send $5.00 CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! Within a few days you will receive, by e-mail, each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so you can send them to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. STEP #2. ADD YOUR MAILING ADDRESS TO THIS LETTER a.Look below for the listing of the four reports. b.After you've ordered the four reports, delete the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle. c.Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d.Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e.Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f.Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you COPY ALL INFORMATION, every name and address, ACCURATELY! STEP #3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to these instructions. Now you are ready to use this entire email to send by email to prospects. Report #1 will tell you how to download bulk email software and email addresses so you can send it out to thousands of people while you sleep! Remember that 50,000+ new people are joining the internet every month. Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $20 and initial bulk mailing cost). You obviously already have a computer and an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! There are two primary methods of building your downline: METHOD #1: SENDING BULK E-MAIL Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume you and all those involved email out only 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a 0.5% response. The response could be much better. Also, many people will email outhundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000 (Why stop at 2000?). But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 0.5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 0.5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The 0.5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The 0.5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 $5 bills for you. CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5,000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF THE 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF 2,000. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! METHOD #2 - PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET Advertising on the internet is very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get ONLY 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Look how this small number accumulates to achieve the STAGGERING results below: 1st level--your first 10 send you $5...........................................................$50 2nd level--10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100).............$500 3rd level--10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000)........$5,000 4th level--10 members from those 1,000 ($5 x 10,000)..$50,000 $$$$$$ THIS TOTALS ----------$55,550 $$$$$$ AMAZING ISN'T IT? Remember friends, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Most people get 100's of participants and many will continue to work this program, sending out programs WITH YOUR NAME ON THEM for years! THINK ABOUT IT! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ People are going to get emails about this plan from you or somebody else and many will work this plan - the question is - Don't you want your name to be on the emails they will send out? * * * DON'T MISS OUT!!! * * * JUST TRY IT ONCE!!! * * * * * SEE WHAT HAPPENS!!! *** YOU'LL BE AMAZED!!!* * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out with YOUR name and address on it will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ GET STARTED TODAY: PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THE FOUR REPORTS NOW. Notes: -- ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH (U.S. CURRENCY) FOR EACH REPORT. CHECKS NOT ACCEPTED. Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in two sheets of paper. On one of those sheets of paper write: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your name & postal address. REPORT #1 "The Insider's Guide to Advertising for Free on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: John Stitzel 3121 Benninghofen Ave. Hamilton, Ohio 45015 REPORT #2 "The Insider's Guide to Sending Bulk E-mail on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: Lorraine Wride 2350 E. Brower St. Simi Valley, CA 93065 REPORT #3 "The Secrets to Multilevel Marketing on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: Dan Rutherford 1215 Linden Ave. Glendale, CA 91201 REPORT #4 "How to become a Millionaire utilizing the Power of Multilevel Marketing and the Internet" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Tina Marie Mitchell 3018 Cottage Grove Court Orlando, FL 32822 ******* TIPS FOR SUCCESS ******* TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. -- Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product/report. It is required for this to be a legal business and they need the reports to send out their letters (with your name on them!) -- ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. -- Be patient and persistent with this program - If you follow the instructions exactly - results WILL FOLLOW. $$$$ ******* YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES ******* Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you don't receive 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT#2. If you don't, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash will continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. To generate more income, simply send another batch of e-mails or continue placing ads and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! Before you make your decision as to whether or not you participate in this program. Please answer one question. ARE YOU HAPPY WITH YOUR PRESENT INCOME OR JOB? If the answer is no, then please look at the following facts about this super simple MLM program: 1. NO face to face selling, NO meetings, NO inventory! NO Telephone calls, NO big cost to start!, NOthing to learn, NO skills needed! (Surely you know how to send email?) 2. No equipment to buy - you already have a computer and internet connection - so you have everything you need to fill orders! 3. You are selling a product which does NOT COST ANYTHING TO PRODUCE OR SHIP! (Emailing copies of the reports is FREE!) 4. All of your customers pay you in CA$H! This program will change your LIFE FOREVER!! Look at the potential for you to be able to quit your job and live a life of luxury you could only dream about! Imagine getting out of debt and buying the car and home of your dreams and being able to work a super-high paying leisurely easy business from home! $$$ FINALLY MAKE SOME DREAMS COME TRUE! $$$ ACT NOW! Take your first step toward achieving financial independence. Order the reports and follow the program outlined above-- SUCCESS will be your reward. Thank you for your time and consideration. PLEASE NOTE: If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal Agency) 1-800-827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax reuirements. Your earnings are highly dependent on your activities and advertising. The information contained on this site and in the report constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the event that it is determined that this site or report constitutes a guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. The earnings amounts listed on this site and in the report are estimates only. If you have any questions of the legality of this program, contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington, DC. ================================================ Under Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter cannot be considered spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. This is a one time e-mail transmission. No request for removal is necessary. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05993 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:47:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05988 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:47:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (gagarin.esys.ca [198.161.92.84]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9DKqIC25013; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:52:18 -0600 Message-ID: <39E775FE.9FA2FAB3@messagingdirect.com> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:52:17 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin CC: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Mark Crispin wrote: > Hi Alexey - > > I think that you misunderstood my proposal. > > It's not 1 or 2a or 2b. It is 1 and (2a or 2b). > > In other words, there would always be the CAPABILITY response code in the > greeeting. > > In addition, capabilities would also be sent with AUTHENTICATE, LOGIN, and > STARTTLS (since they can change as a result of these commands); the only > question is whether we use the untagged CAPABILITY response, or the new > CAPABILITY response code for this case. > > I'm glad that you like the idea. I hope that with this clarification you like > it even better! Ok, in this case I would prefer having untagged CAPABILITY response both times. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05697 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:31:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (den@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05693 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:32:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY To: Alexey Melnikov cc: Mark Crispin , IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: <39E7712B.5349C4D8@messagingdirect.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Hi Alexey - I think that you misunderstood my proposal. It's not 1 or 2a or 2b. It is 1 and (2a or 2b). In other words, there would always be the CAPABILITY response code in the greeeting. In addition, capabilities would also be sent with AUTHENTICATE, LOGIN, and STARTTLS (since they can change as a result of these commands); the only question is whether we use the untagged CAPABILITY response, or the new CAPABILITY response code for this case. I'm glad that you like the idea. I hope that with this clarification you like it even better! -- Mark -- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05635 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:27:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05630 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (gagarin.esys.ca [198.161.92.84]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9DKVdC24740; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:31:39 -0600 Message-ID: <39E7712B.5349C4D8@messagingdirect.com> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:31:39 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin CC: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Mark Crispin wrote: > I am thinking about reducing the number of RTTs in a typical IMAP session. > Can anyone come up with a good reason why these should NOT be added to IMAP. Hopefully not :-). > Everything is optional, and requires both client and server cluefullness. > > 1) New CAPABILITY response-code, to be used in the initial OK or PREAUTH > greeting. A client that sees this response-code can use the data in it > instead of issuing a separate CAPABILITY command. > > 2a) Option 1: server sends an untagged CAPABILITY response when doing a LOGIN, > AUTHENTICATE, or STARTTLS. > 2b) Option 2: server uses CAPABILITY response code. 1 or 2b works for me. 2b on connection is even better (unless there are some broken clients that die on this response :-)). I don't like 2a, because you need this data in order to do AUTHENTICATE/STARTTLS/LOGIN. > The disadvantage is extra data sent to clients that don't know about the new > mechanism. > > I believe that the disadvantage is minor compared to the potential advantage. Yep. Alexey Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05071 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (tober@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05067 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 12:50:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY To: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: I am thinking about reducing the number of RTTs in a typical IMAP session. Can anyone come up with a good reason why these should NOT be added to IMAP. Everything is optional, and requires both client and server cluefullness. 1) New CAPABILITY response-code, to be used in the initial OK or PREAUTH greeting. A client that sees this response-code can use the data in it instead of issuing a separate CAPABILITY command. 2a) Option 1: server sends an untagged CAPABILITY response when doing a LOGIN, AUTHENTICATE, or STARTTLS. 2b) Option 2: server uses CAPABILITY response code. There is a theoretical ambiguity in option 1 of confusion between a "here are the new capabilities after doing the command" and "here is an unsolicited set of capabilities changing the previous state." I don't think that this is a real problem (we can certainly legislate the interpretation); but we can use option 2 if people insist. The advantage is the elimination of two, possible three, RTTs per session if the client knows about the mechanism. In a "check for new mail" only session, this can be as much as a 42% reduction. The disadvantage is extra data sent to clients that don't know about the new mechanism. I believe that the disadvantage is minor compared to the potential advantage. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA24409 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:43:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA24405 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:43:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (2-022-edm.dial.worldgate.ca [207.167.2.22]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9D3lVC16624; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:47:31 -0600 Message-ID: <39E685D1.15CEB9A0@messagingdirect.com> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:47:30 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lawrence Greenfield CC: Mark Crispin , Barry Leiba , ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: Re: comments on LIST extensions References: <200010122302.e9CN2RG01290@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > > * REMOTE option > > The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on > > the LIST response. > > This may be a justification for additional data. Was this what you were > thinking of? I don't think that the actual location should be > returned as the matching mailbox name; we need the name that > matched. > > This is exactly what I was thinking of. Example: > > * LIST () "/" "Bread" (REMOTE "http://imap3.example.com/Bread") > > Clearly the extension data can be designed along the lines of the > FETCH response. Also we need an item to describe replicas of the mailbox (REPLICA URL1 URL2 ...) And I agree that REFERRAL is better than REMOTE. Alexey Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA24035 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA24030 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (2-022-edm.dial.worldgate.ca [207.167.2.22]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9D3PvC16532; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:25:58 -0600 Message-ID: <39E680C2.AFC2DC62@messagingdirect.com> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:25:54 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin CC: Lawrence Greenfield , ietf-imapext@imc.org, Barry Leiba Subject: ACL info in extended LIST (Was Re: comments on LIST extensions) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Mark Crispin wrote: > On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > > * Additional data > > The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags > > to be returned. > > What type of additional data are you considering that can not be represented > by LIST attributes? I'm not opposed to making the LIST response extensible, > but before this is done there should be a compelling reason to do it beyond > "it would be nice". > > My ACLPLUS plan, for example, codes ACL information in LIST attributes. Mark, you proposed the following: > Here's how the RFC 2086 response examples would look in ACLPLUS > * ACL INBOX Fred rwipslda => * LIST (\NoInferiors \ACL:Fred=rwipslda) "" INBOX > > * LISTRIGHTS ~/Mail/saved smith la r swicd => * LIST (\NoInferiors \RIGHTS:smith=la_r_swicd) "" INBOX > > * MYRIGHTS INBOX => * LIST (\NoInferiors \MYRIGHTS=rwipslda) "" INBOX I like the idea of LIST response including ACLs and related stuff (but I agree with Larry that is should be returned only if it was asked for), however syntax as proposed doesn't work. First of all, you assume that identifier can't contain neither spaces, neither equal sign. The solution will be to use lists, something like the following: * LIST (\NoInferiors) "" INBOX (ACL ("Fred Dowson" rwipslda "Alexey Melnikov" rws)) Alexey Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA20902 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (carl@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20895 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 16:06:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: comments on LIST extensions To: Lawrence Greenfield cc: Barry Leiba , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: <200010122302.e9CN2RG01290@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu, 12 Oct 2000 19:02:27 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > Overloading LIST attributes is inelegant, and forces the server to > always return data that the client didn't ask for. I disagree on both points. We have the LIST response attribute mechanism available to convey additional data; furthermore, it has extensibility (review RFC 2060). There is no need to change the LIST response in any way. Nobody says that the server should be "forced to always return data"; nor do LIST attributes have such a requirement. New attributes should be returned only if the client requests them (and the server indicates that they are available), or if the server is willing to offer them for free. > Encoding it as > extension data that can be requested by the client is the right way to > go. The same is true of LIST attributes that can be requested by the client. However, it doesn't require syntax changes to the LIST response. Instead, it uses an extension mechanism which is already there. > * LIST () "/" "Bread" (REMOTE "http://imap3.example.com/Bread") If this is really desirable, it should be separate from REMOTE, e.g. REFERRAL; or perhaps this functionality should be done by STATUS. I am not convinced that it's a good idea to change the syntax of the LIST response just to make it possible to expand referrals via wildcards. This may not be an inexpensive operation. It should not be mandatory to implement. Resist the temptation to add mandatory functionality to an existing mechanism. RLIST is an existing mechanism, and needs a direct replacement in extended LIST. > I don't understand what you mean by "actual name". Those was your nomenclature. In the example, it was "Bread". The local name, as opposed to the referral. > Read in the bookmark list. For each mailbox, iterate over it, > fetching the relevant information from the mailstore at the time. Here's what you've missed: What do you do when the bookmark refers to a name that doesn't exist? What do you do when the bookmark contains a remote name, requiring a connection to another server? In other words, the LSUB name itself is a referral. > For instance, one Unix client I perused once issues a LIST > for every returned mailbox from LSUB, since it couldn't depend on the > information from LSUB being usable. Yes, bad clients exist. They pay the performance penalty for being a bad client. Fortunately, most clients aren't bad clients. But that doesn't mean that we have to force servers to implement the bad thing, for no other reason than the specification provides no way out for the server. > we need a way for the server to say > "there are mailboxes of interest underneath this mailbox, but you > requested them not to be returned". We also need a way for a server to refuse to offer this information. This is what the whole issue is about. It isn't about whether or not a functionality should exist. It's about whether or not a server is permitted to implement one functionality without having to implement a different functionality that is too costly. We MUST allow a server to decide what to offer in extended LIST. Either have a separate LSUBEXT, or have a separate capability to indicate whether or not SUBSCRIBE is available to extended LIST. It is bad protocol design to hold the implementation of one functionality hostage to the implementation of another. People who advocate this often express fear that the latter functionality won't get implemented -- which is precisely what should happen. Additional functionality should stand on its own; if it can't then it deserves to die. This isn't the first time that I've sounded alarm bells over a tendency in this group to hold one functionality hostage to another. I'm afraid that it won't be the last time. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA19201 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 15:57:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (SMTP5.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.85]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19197 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 15:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from penguin.andrew.cmu.edu (PENGUIN.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.122.2]) (authenticated as leg with KERBEROS_V4 (56 bits)) by smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9CN2RG01290; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 19:02:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 19:02:27 -0400 Message-Id: <200010122302.e9CN2RG01290@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> From: Lawrence Greenfield X-Mailer: BatIMail version 3.2 To: Mark Crispin Cc: Barry Leiba , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-reply-to: Subject: Re: comments on LIST extensions References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 11:51:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org, Barry Leiba On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > * Additional data > The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags > to be returned. What type of additional data are you considering that can not be represented by LIST attributes? I'm not opposed to making the LIST response extensible, but before this is done there should be a compelling reason to do it beyond "it would be nice". My ACLPLUS plan, for example, codes ACL information in LIST attributes. Overloading LIST attributes is inelegant, and forces the server to always return data that the client didn't ask for. Encoding it as extension data that can be requested by the client is the right way to go. > * REMOTE option > The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on > the LIST response. This may be a justification for additional data. Was this what you were thinking of? I don't think that the actual location should be returned as the matching mailbox name; we need the name that matched. This is exactly what I was thinking of. Example: * LIST () "/" "Bread" (REMOTE "http://imap3.example.com/Bread") Clearly the extension data can be designed along the lines of the FETCH response. Possibly every list-extension return data should also be accessible via STATUS and vice-versa. The "actual name" should be the referral. Also, how does CHILD interact with this? I can think of arguments for it to apply to the matching name or to the actual name. It is major bad news if it applies to the actual name, but that suggests a particular implementation of referrals. I don't understand what you mean by "actual name". \HasChildren should be returned when there are children in _this_ namespace. \HasNoChildren should be returned when there are no children in _this_ namespace. Both of this are local decisions that the server responding to the LIST command can make. This should be stated in the LISTEXT spec or an updated referral spec. > * SUBSCRIBE option > I'm all in favor of the SUBSCRIBE option as outlined in the draft. > Cyrus implements subscriptions as a seperate list (not an attribute on > the mailbox) and I don't see any barrier to implementing this. This is not a sufficient reason for breaking the reference implementation. The SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE/LSUB mechanism was defined to support the mailbox bookmarking functionality of UW imapd. I don't understand how this "breaks" the UW implementation. Read in the bookmark list. For each mailbox, iterate over it, fetching the relevant information from the mailstore at the time. The exact same information can be returned from the LIST (SUBSCRIBED) as from LSUB---in fact, I find the difference between what LSUB returns and what LIST returns to be extremely confusing for client implementors. If clients want information like CHILDREN, they will get it from the server. For instance, one Unix client I perused once issues a LIST for every returned mailbox from LSUB, since it couldn't depend on the information from LSUB being usable. > However, I don't see an explicit definition of what happens if I'm > subscribed to "Vegetable/Broccoli" and I issue > a LIST (SUBSCRIBE) "" "%" > what hint do you get that "there's something under vegetable you're > interesting in"? Current servers return a \Noselect with LSUB, which > is not what we want---in fact, it's not even explicit in the base > spec, I believe. This is an excellent example of why subscriptions are a special case and should be handled separately. No, not at all. Another possible extension would be a LIST (UNSEEN) "" "%" * LIST () "/" "Fruit" * LIST (\Placeholder) "/" "Vegetable" a OK done where the "UNSEEN" extension lists mailboxes with unseen messages. Again, for the LIST extension, we need a way for the server to say "there are mailboxes of interest underneath this mailbox, but you requested them not to be returned". "UNSEEN" is not a wonderful example. Perhaps "MARKED", to return only mailboxes that are \Marked, would be more reasonable. > We need to make sure that additional options later won't have to > specify how they interact with every existing option. SUBSCRIBE is the one that stands out. ACL type options are something that I want to do sooner rather than later, and they will all fit in smoothly... except with SUBSCRIBE. Not at all. SUBSCRIBE is the only option that currently filters on a property of mailboxes---but future options might also do this. Larry Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA05071 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 03:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA05067 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 03:26:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05605; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:31:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200010111031.GAA05605@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:31:13 -0400 Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Internet Message Access Protocol Extension Working Group of the IETF. Title : INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - THREAD EXTENSION Author(s) : M. Crispin, K. Murchison Filename : draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt Pages : 13 Date : 10-Oct-00 This document describes the server-based threading extension to the IMAP4rev1 protocol. This extension provides substantial performance improvements for IMAP clients which offer threaded views. A server which supports this extension indicates this with more or more capability names consisting of 'THREAD-' followed by a supported threading algorithm name as described in this document. This provides for future upwards-compatible extensions. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001010123240.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001010123240.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA00169 for ietf-imapext-bks; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unity-mail.icomverse.com ([199.203.140.35]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA00153 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by unity-mail.icomverse.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <4KGYV264>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:29:17 +0200 Message-ID: <479518ED4F21D411B46D0030480035BC1C4994@unity-mail.icomverse.com> From: "Erev, Ari" To: "'IMAP@cac.washington.edu'" , "'ietf-imapext@IMC.ORG'" Subject: IMAP Streaming Support Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:29:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Hello, On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Stefano Santoro from VoiceTek posted the following to the IMAP mailing list. > I was wandering if someone has thought about adding an IMAP capability > expressively designed to support streaming media formats (i.e.: voice > and/or video mail). Any capability that would enable an e-mail > client play a voice message while the message is being "FETCH"ed > using streaming protocol handshakes, and delivery discipline. > > Any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated, > > Thanks, > Stefano Santoro > Voicetek Corporation, Inc. This post was followed by a number of responses from various people. There was also a post (by Jonathan Taylor from Mediagate) that indicates that this issue was to be discussed in an IMAP workgroup meeting in late 1998. I was wondering whether "Streaming Support" founds its way to IMAP in any form (draft, proposed standard). If yes - can you please point me in the right direction? If it has NOT been standardized - is there some common practice used by imap clients/servers for the streaming functionality? Thanks, Ari Erev Comverse Network Systems Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA12397 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 17:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail3.mia.bellsouth.net (mail3.mia.bellsouth.net [205.152.144.15]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA12392 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 17:38:36 -0700 (PDT) From: bubblehead32@hotmail.com Received: from www.goldendeckcasino.com (adsl-61-143-206.mia.bellsouth.net [208.61.143.206]) by mail3.mia.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with SMTP id UAA18578; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 20:42:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200010090042.UAA18578@mail3.mia.bellsouth.net> To: <> Subject: WOW!!! Highest Payouts Around!!!!!!!! Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 20:26:03 -0400 X-Sender: bubblehead32@hotmail.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Its just like being there. Go to www.goldendeckcasino.com/goldendeckcasino/links/2769.html. If you would like to be removed from these mailings in the future please mailto:bubblehead32@hotmail.com?subject=remove Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA11129 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.tclking.com (IDENT:root@szptt103-190.szptt.net.cn [202.103.190.164] (may be forged)) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA11125 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:00:19 -0700 (PDT) From: rsb@docsj.de Received: from pavilion (mig-fl29a-49.rasserver.net [206.214.131.49]) by www.tclking.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA26400; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:18:16 +0800 Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:18:16 +0800 Message-Id: <200010082318.HAA26400@www.tclking.com> To: rsb@docsj.de Subject: At last, HERBAL V the all natural alternative! Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Herbal V: An Incredible All-Natural Healthy Alternative Herbal V is the All Natural Approach to Male Virility, Vitality and Pleasure. Available N o w ! Welcome to the New Sexual Revolution. It's the all natural male potency and pleasure pill that men everywhere are buzzing about. Herbal V is safe, natural and specifically formulated to help support male sexual function and pleasure. You just take two easy-to-swallow tablets one hour before sex. And there's more great news - you can get Herbal V for less than $1 a pill. Amazing word of mouth praise on Herbal V has been spreading like wildfire-already over 1,500,000 men have chosen Herbal V. Since it is 100% natural you will never have to worry about safety. Try doctor-recommended Herbal V today and have the greatest night of your life! Herbal V... Bringing Back the Magic! 1,585,000 men can't be wrong. To date over 1 million men have tried the super supplement Herbal V. Here is why: No Doctor Visit Required Available Over the Counter Not a Drug 100% Natural Safe, No Worries Highest Quality Pharmaceutical-Grade Pure Nutriceuticals Guaranteed Potency & Purity Be a Real Man Again! Questions and Answers What is Herbal V? Herbal V is a proprietary blend that was specifically developed as a safe alternative for men who prefer an all-natural approach to address impotence and boost sexual performance. This amazing formula first became popular with Hollywood insiders and the wealthy elite. They were maximizing their sex lives, long before it was available to the general public. How does Herbal V work? Developed by a team whose goal was to create the perfect all-natural aphrodisiac. Herbal V is the result of that remarkable effort. The Herbal V formula contains a precise blend of cutting edge pro-sexual nutrients from around the world that provide nutritional support, making it possible for a man to have a pleasurable sexual experience. What can Herbal V do for me? Herbal V helps support male sexual function and pleasure in a safe and natural manner. Simply put, it can make your sex life incredible. Is Herbal V Safe? One of the great things about Herbal V is that it is not a drug. It is an incredible herbal dietary supplement that provides nutritional support for male sexual function and pleasure. One of the most comforting features of Herbal V is that you never have to worry about safety. Herbal V: Safe - Natural - Exciting Many have speculated that because Herbal V is so popular with men, it must contain prescription drugs or chemical components. Herbal V does not contain any elements or traces of any prescription drug. Herbal V is made using the world's most technologically advanced state-of-the-art cold processing equipment to ensure maximum purity. Herbal V has been independently analyzed by the nation's premier testing facility to ensure purity, quality and to end the rumors that, because it is so popular, it must somehow be chemical. It is not. Herbal V is natural - just as it says on the label. Herbal V is simply fantastic! Herbal V: Ingredients Yohimbe, saw palmetto, avena sativa, androstenedione, guarana, taurine, siberian ginseng, tribulus terrestris. Tribulus Terrestis is certified to enhanced testosterone levels by increasing Luteinzing hormone (LH) levels. Androstenedione which is a precursor to testosterone unlocks bound testosterone and makes it biologically active again quickly. This means a dramatic surge in desire. Avena Sativa Stimulates the neurotransmitter pleasure centers to maximum capacity. This greatly intensifies pleasure. Just listen to what Herbal V has done for the sex lives of people like you! “On a scale of 1 to 10, it's a 15. Electrifying. It's like a wonder pill!” — Justin Q B., New Haven, Texas “I haven't had sexual relations in 11 years. Then with Herbal V it was... wow! It works again!” — Sid R., Lakeland, Florida “I had sex four times in one night. It made me feel like a 19-year-old again.” — Chip S, Beech Mountain, North Carolina “Herbal V has turned my husband into a Sexual Superman! I like the fact that it's all natural and has no side effects. It's bringing back the good old days.” — Jennifer B, Beverly Hills, California The above testimonials are from product literature, and we have not independently verified them. However, the following testimonial is from a "senior" gentleman who has purchased his second bottle of Herbal V. When we heard his words with our own ears, we asked his permission to print them here. “Man! I'm wild as I can be! I feel like I'm 25 years old again! I'm not believing this!” — Mr. Murphy, age 64, Lampart, IL. Risk Free: Double Your Money Back Guarantee If Herbal V does not give the desired results as stated above, simply return the unused portion for a double-your money back refund. No questions asked ! Order Now: Safe, Fast, Secure, Private Herbal V with its DOUBLE YOUR MONEY BACK GUARANTEE is available only through this special promotional offer. Herbal V arrives in plain packaging for your privacy. Any and all information is kept strictly confidential. Payment Methods You may FAX or Postal Mail Checks, MasterCard, Visa, & American Express.payments. Money Orders are accepted only by Postal Mail. Each bottle of Herbal V contains 30 tablets, approximately a 1 month supply. Step 1: Place a check by your desired quanity. ______ 1 Bottle of Herbal V $24 ______ 2 Bottles of Herbal V $44 ______ 3 Bottles of Herbal V $59 Please add $6 shipping and handling for any size order. [ Total cost including shipping & handling, 1 bottle=$30, 2 bottles=$50, 3 bottles=$65 ] International Orders Please add $16 shipping and handling for any size order. [ Total cost including shipping & handling, 1 bottle=$40, 2 bottles=$60, 3 bottles=$75 ] Step 2: Place a check by your desired payment method and complete fields if necessary. _____Check or CHECK-BY-FAX [details below] _____Money Order _____American Express Account Number__________________ Exp____/____ _____Visa Account Number__________________ Exp____/____ _____MasterCard Account Number__________________ Exp____/____ Please make your check or money order payable to "Lion Sciences National". Step 3: Please complete and print the following fields clearly. Name ___________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________ City ____________________________________________________ State ___________________________________________________ Zip _____________________________________________________ E-mail __________________________________________________ Signature _________________________________________________ [ required for check and credit card orders] Toll Free FAX Order Line: 1-800-940-6590 If faxing in your order, please state whether you require a fax, email, or no confirmation at all. Allow up to one day for confirmation, if requested. FAX orders are processed immediately. Or, print & mail to: LSN 3502 N. Powerline Rd. #525 Pompano Beach, FL 33069 ______________________________________________________ *CHECK BY FAX ORDERS: Complete the check as normal. Tape the check in the area below. Below the check, clearly write the check number, all numbers at the bottom of the check, & your name. Tape the check below and fax the check to the toll free FAX number above. Void the check. Our merchant will electronically debit your account for the amount of the check; your reference number for this transaction will be your check number. Nothing could be safer & easier ! TAPE CHECK BELOW _____________________________________________________________ This is a one time mailing: Removal is automatic and no further contact is necessary. Please Note: Herbal V is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. As individuals differ, so will results. Herbal V helps provide herbal and nutritional support for male sexual performance. The FDA has not evaluated these statements. For details about our double your money back guarantee, please write to the above address, attention consumer affairs department; enclose a self addressed stamped envelope for this and any requested contact information. Thank You. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA14469 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (bill@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA14464 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 11:51:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: comments on LIST extensions To: Lawrence Greenfield cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org, Barry Leiba In-Reply-To: <200010061731.e96HVPH02499@smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > * Additional data > The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags > to be returned. What type of additional data are you considering that can not be represented by LIST attributes? I'm not opposed to making the LIST response extensible, but before this is done there should be a compelling reason to do it beyond "it would be nice". My ACLPLUS plan, for example, codes ACL information in LIST attributes. > * REMOTE option > The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on > the LIST response. This may be a justification for additional data. Was this what you were thinking of? I don't think that the actual location should be returned as the matching mailbox name; we need the name that matched. The "actual name" should be the referral. Also, how does CHILD interact with this? I can think of arguments for it to apply to the matching name or to the actual name. It is major bad news if it applies to the actual name, but that suggests a particular implementation of referrals. > * SUBSCRIBE option > I'm all in favor of the SUBSCRIBE option as outlined in the draft. > Cyrus implements subscriptions as a seperate list (not an attribute on > the mailbox) and I don't see any barrier to implementing this. This is not a sufficient reason for breaking the reference implementation. The SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE/LSUB mechanism was defined to support the mailbox bookmarking functionality of UW imapd. > However, I don't see an explicit definition of what happens if I'm > subscribed to "Vegetable/Broccoli" and I issue > a LIST (SUBSCRIBE) "" "%" > what hint do you get that "there's something under vegetable you're > interesting in"? Current servers return a \Noselect with LSUB, which > is not what we want---in fact, it's not even explicit in the base > spec, I believe. This is an excellent example of why subscriptions are a special case and should be handled separately. > * Children option > Finally, I don't understand what purpose making the CHILDREN > information optional if the client asks for it. If you insist upon shoehorning SUBSCRIBE into the extended LIST, you have no choice. It's going to happen. You won't get remotes either. The problem is that you are attempting to make an incompatible change to IMAP. You can't do that. All these problems will go away if you take SUBSCRIBE out of LIST, and create an LSUBEXT if you really want that capability. > For instance: what's the relation between CHILDREN and SUBSCRIBE? > Does \HasChildren indicate that there are subscribed mailboxes below > this one, or does it indicate that there are any mailboxes below this? Once again, take SUBSCRIBE out, and do LSUBEXT if that's what you really want. You're making lots of unnecessary trouble for yourselves (and to me!) by keeping SUBSCRIBE. I doubt that the modest gain (8 octets in CAPABILITY) is worth it. > We need to make sure that additional options later won't have to > specify how they interact with every existing option. SUBSCRIBE is the one that stands out. ACL type options are something that I want to do sooner rather than later, and they will all fit in smoothly... except with SUBSCRIBE. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA12811 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu (SMTP4.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.84]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA12807 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from penguin.andrew.cmu.edu (PENGUIN.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.122.2]) (authenticated as leg with KERBEROS_V4 (56 bits)) by smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e96HVPH02499; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:26 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400 Message-Id: <200010061731.e96HVPH02499@smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu> From: Lawrence Greenfield X-Mailer: BatIMail version 3.2 To: ietf-imapext@imc.org Cc: Barry Leiba Subject: comments on LIST extensions Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Here are some issues that I already bounced off of Barry, and he seems to agree with most of what I say below (or he'll jump on me, either way). This message will touch on much of the draft. * Additional data The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags to be returned. This would allow additional data returned for clients that request it, instead of forcing a potentially length back'n'forth for data that the client will eventually get anyway. * REMOTE option The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on the LIST response. I need this so that my aggregator can transparently proxy for clients that don't understand referrals. It also saves the client a roundtrip of trying to SELECT a mailbox that doesn't exist on this server---we might as well tell the client where the mailbox is off the bat. * SUBSCRIBE option I'm all in favor of the SUBSCRIBE option as outlined in the draft. Cyrus implements subscriptions as a seperate list (not an attribute on the mailbox) and I don't see any barrier to implementing this. However, I don't see an explicit definition of what happens if I'm subscribed to "Vegetable/Broccoli" and I issue a LIST (SUBSCRIBE) "" "%" what hint do you get that "there's something under vegetable you're interesting in"? Current servers return a \Noselect with LSUB, which is not what we want---in fact, it's not even explicit in the base spec, I believe. We should find a flag (\Placeholder?) to indicate this. * Children option Finally, I don't understand what purpose making the CHILDREN information optional if the client asks for it. If the server doesn't return it, the client will eventually make the server do the work anyway, by sending additional commands. Solution: if the client specifies CHILDREN, the server MUST send \HasChildren or \HasNoChildren with each returned mailbox. * Option interactions I think making sure that options are parametric to each other is a very important feature. (This is something that Sieve, for example, does very badly.) For instance: what's the relation between CHILDREN and SUBSCRIBE? Does \HasChildren indicate that there are subscribed mailboxes below this one, or does it indicate that there are any mailboxes below this? (Neither Barry nor I know any easy way out of this.) We need to make sure that additional options later won't have to specify how they interact with every existing option. -- Thanks, Larry Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA02569 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:01:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout2.cac.washington.edu (mxout2.cac.washington.edu [140.142.33.4]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA02565 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout2.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id PAA26075; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:05:26 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (johnbill@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id PAA14118; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:05:26 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:48:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: List attributes - was Re: LIST extensions I-D To: Steve Hole cc: IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:37:37 -0600, Steve Hole wrote: > If we do a different list command, from the ground up, I will strenously > argue for an alternative model. As always, one will be free to > implement said extension or not. A different LIST command from the ground up with an alternative model is fine. In which case, we also need a set of commands to define, remove, and itemize mailbox bookmarks. Hmm. Perhaps we can call one command SUBSCRIBE, another command UNSUBSCRIBE, and the third LSUB. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA01779 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:34:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA01775 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kepler (kepler.esys.ca [198.161.92.108]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e94LcPt20290; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:38:25 -0600 From: Steve Hole Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:37:37 -0600 To: Mark Crispin Subject: List attributes - was Re: LIST extensions I-D Cc: IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Mailer: Execmail for Win32 5.1.1 Build (10) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Mark Crispin wrote: > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:10 -0600, Steve Hole wrote: > > I disagree. I think that subscription is an > > attribute of a folder. > > If subscription is an attribute of a mailbox then how do you handle > subscriptions of mailboxes that don't exist (which *is* required by the > specification)? Which you put in the specification, I vehemently disagreed with, but for the sake of getting it out the door, capitulated on. In retrospect it sucks. I never liked it, and I like even less now. But ... it doesn't matter. This is all water under the bridge and you and I have disagreed on this particular matter many times before. It is the way it is and it cannot change. This draft does talk about extending LIST and because of that I'll agree that it conflicts with the existing LIST semantic. However. If we do a different list command, from the ground up, I will strenously argue for an alternative model. As always, one will be free to implement said extension or not. > Yes, there are quite a few other types of attributes. But they all apply to > mailboxes which exist. Which is fine. Users with access to shared mailbox collections want to group or subset folders by some other meaningful classification system. "Subscription" as a concept is one such classification system. It has the merit of being easily understood because of the precedent in News. As a client writer wishing to support such a feature I want to search for a set of folders that match criteria that examines data attributes on the folders and returns matching results. I want to issue one command to do the search and get the desired information. Cheers. --- Steve Hole Messaging Direct Mailto:Steve.Hole@MessagingDirect.com Phone: 780-424-4922 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA00946 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout1.cac.washington.edu (mxout1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.5]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA00942 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout1.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id OAA01722; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:06:09 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (strider@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id OAA03004; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:06:09 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:04:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: LIST extensions I-D To: Steve Hole cc: leiba@watson.ibm.com, IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:10 -0600, Steve Hole wrote: > I disagree. I think that subscription is an > attribute of a folder. If subscription is an attribute of a mailbox then how do you handle subscriptions of mailboxes that don't exist (which *is* required by the specification)? > In fact, I would suggest that there may be > several other types of attributes associated with a folder and would like > them all treated as such. Yes, there are quite a few other types of attributes. But they all apply to mailboxes which exist. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA00834 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 13:59:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00830 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 13:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kepler (kepler.esys.ca [198.161.92.108]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e94L2wt19965; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:58 -0600 From: Steve Hole Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:10 -0600 To: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: LIST extensions I-D Cc: leiba@watson.ibm.com, IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Mailer: Execmail for Win32 5.1.1 Build (10) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:20:33 -0700 (PDT) Mark Crispin wrote: > I would also like to issue a loud "MUMBLE!" about the SUBSCRIPTIONS list > option. IMHO, this is not a good idea, since it has an implied assumption > subscriptions is a state of a mailbox rather than a newsrc-type list. > > Unlike the other LIST options, subscriptions are a completely different > namespace, and can refer to names that don't exist. The other LIST options > simply add data to the LIST results; they don't do a complete change of > namespace. I feel that SUBSCRIPTIONS muddy the waters. I disagree. I think that subscription is an attribute of a folder. In fact, I would suggest that there may be several other types of attributes associated with a folder and would like them all treated as such. > I am also concerned about the interaction between SUBSCRIPTIONS and the other > list options. IMHO, this isn't particularly useful (unless you have a > completely wrongheaded idea of how to use subscriptions...). When subscribed > proxy names are put into this picture, CHILDREN and REMOTE can really become > costly. Completely, totally dependent on your implementation. In fact, for us it is quite quick to do this. We have disagreed on this issue before however :-). > I suggest a separate LSUBEXT extension if this is really desired (I suspect > that LSUBEXT won't be widely implemented) that would add list options to LSUB. > At least, there should be an extension to control SUBSCRIPTIONS in LISTEXT. > > It doesn't add any real cost to have LSUBEXT (OK, 8 additional octets in the > CAPABILITIES), but it can make an enormous difference to some servers. In fact, we had talked about a complete new list command extension that incorporates all of these concepts together, along with folder annotations and some other things. This was discussed in IMAPext -- who ended up with this? What is the status? Cheers. --- Steve Hole Messaging Direct Mailto:Steve.Hole@MessagingDirect.com Phone: 780-424-4922 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA23634 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout1.cac.washington.edu (mxout1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.5]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA23630 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout1.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id IAA08542; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:48:40 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (ctw@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id IAA11668; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:48:40 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:20:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: LIST extensions I-D To: leiba@watson.ibm.com cc: IMAP Extensions WG Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: I agree with the basic concept, and in fact intend to implement this sooner rather than later because it ties in with other work that I want to do. However, I would like to request a change in syntax, to: list = "LIST" SP mailbox SP list-mailbox [SP list-options] It's a minor tweak; a slightly simpler command parse and IMHO architecturally cleaner. It doesn't make the command line any larger. The parentheses around the list-options should be retained, even though they are "not necessary" with my tweak. This is to allow the addition of a fourth argument to the LIST command in the future. I would also like to issue a loud "MUMBLE!" about the SUBSCRIPTIONS list option. IMHO, this is not a good idea, since it has an implied assumption subscriptions is a state of a mailbox rather than a newsrc-type list. Unlike the other LIST options, subscriptions are a completely different namespace, and can refer to names that don't exist. The other LIST options simply add data to the LIST results; they don't do a complete change of namespace. I feel that SUBSCRIPTIONS muddy the waters. I am also concerned about the interaction between SUBSCRIPTIONS and the other list options. IMHO, this isn't particularly useful (unless you have a completely wrongheaded idea of how to use subscriptions...). When subscribed proxy names are put into this picture, CHILDREN and REMOTE can really become costly. I suggest a separate LSUBEXT extension if this is really desired (I suspect that LSUBEXT won't be widely implemented) that would add list options to LSUB. At least, there should be an extension to control SUBSCRIPTIONS in LISTEXT. It doesn't add any real cost to have LSUBEXT (OK, 8 additional octets in the CAPABILITIES), but it can make an enormous difference to some servers. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA05003 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:51:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA04999 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:51:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA14870; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 06:55:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200010041055.GAA14870@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 06:55:05 -0400 Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Internet Message Access Protocol Extension Working Group of the IETF. Title : IMAP4 LIST Command Extensions Author(s) : B. Leiba Filename : draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt Pages : 7 Date : 03-Oct-00 IMAP4 has two commands for listing mailboxes: LIST and LSUB. As we add extensions that require specialized lists (see [MboxRefer] for an example) we expand the number of list commands, as each extension must add its function to both LIST and LSUB. This document describes extensions to the LIST command that allow these additions to be done in mutually compatible options to the LIST command, avoiding the exponential increase in specialized list commands. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001003122858.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001003122858.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA23080 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:12:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (ph18@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA23076 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:12:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 12:50:48 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Pete Resnick cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:13:14 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: > I believe allowing the server to ignore the issue is the moral > equivalent of encouraging the clients of building its own equivalence > classes. I don't think so. There is not today a lot of UTF-8 mail flowing around, and IMAP is certainly not the only protocol that is obliged to wrestle with this issue. I don't see any reason why IMAP (and especially not IMAP REGEX) should take the lead, particularly given no guarantee that other protocols will follow that lead. Since it is not an issue specific to REGEX, and instead affects SEARCH, SORT, and THREAD as well; I recommend that action be deferred to a specification on IMAP i18n. > Like I said, I don't care if we just say "Thou shalt do > fully composed", but I think we've got to say something. How can we say such a thing? We could do that for string arguments to IMAP commands, but we can't control what gets sent in 822/SMTP. I *think* that most people do fully-composed today. I know that I convert the ISO-8859-1 character 0xe4 (German umlaut-a) to U+00e4 and not U+0061 U+0308. I'm not sure that we can guarantee that everybody will do that. Also, do we have a guarantee that Unicode isn't going to add any more composed characters? I recall that Unicode is unwilling to do so, but is that an absolute prohibition? If we don't have an absolute prohibition, that means that "fully composed" today can differ from "fully composed" tommorrow. I really think that we need a separate IMAP i18n BCP. Here's another reason. As far as I can tell, Cyrus ignores combining characters entirely; that is, U+00e4 is canonicalized to U+0061 (and hence matches U+0041 too). I don't think that this is right, but arguably it's better than my server's failure to match U+00e4 as equivalent to U+0041 U+0308. I think that we need a definite ruling resolving this. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id LAA20910 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:08:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme-software.com (presnick-fw.flexabit.net [64.198.230.34]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id LAA20905 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:08:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from presnick-35.flexabit.net (64.198.230.35) by episteme-software.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.2a2); Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:12:56 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: resnick@resnick1.qualcomm.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 5.0b25-09.00] Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 13:13:14 -0500 To: Mark Crispin From: Pete Resnick Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On 10/23/00 at 10:37 AM -0700, Mark Crispin wrote: >On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:28 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: >>I.e. the client can build its own equivelence classes using >>grouping and logical OR. > >I can just envison a client author getting a maniacal gleam in his eye upon >hearing this! It may not be too bad if you stick to your own language (the >Koreans may think otherwise). But I don't think that anyone would be happy >being told this. > >I agree with Pete that if composed characters are done, it should be in the >server, not the client. However, I disagree with him in that I believe that >we must allow a server to ignore the issue. I believe allowing the server to ignore the issue is the moral equivalent of encouraging the clients of building its own equivalence classes. Like I said, I don't care if we just say "Thou shalt do fully composed", but I think we've got to say something. pr -- Pete Resnick Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA20338 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:54:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (wafan@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA20334 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:54:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:37:36 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: Pete Resnick , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:28 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > > This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that > > composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. > Well, if the feeling is that servers should just punt on this for now, > can we leave it up to the client to handle this? I.e. the client can build > its own equivelence classes using grouping and logical OR. I can just envison a client author getting a maniacal gleam in his eye upon hearing this! It may not be too bad if you stick to your own language (the Koreans may think otherwise). But I don't think that anyone would be happy being told this. I agree with Pete that if composed characters are done, it should be in the server, not the client. However, I disagree with him in that I believe that we must allow a server to ignore the issue. Otherwise, we create an excessive barrier to implementation. Remember, it's not just decomposition, it's also canonical ordering. Decomposition could be done by a (big) table lookup; canonical ordering requires code. Character composition is not just a REGEX issue. It's an issue with SEARCH, SORT, and THREAD as well. This strongly indicates to me that REGEX should punt this to a separate IMAP-i18n BCP specification. Who knows. The IETF may decide upon a BCP for canonical representation of Unicode strings, and mandate that application protocols can assume that all Unicode strings are already in this canonical form (so the "punt" was right). [No, I'm not holding my breath. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA19390 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA19386 for ; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 10:21:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9NHQSk00667; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:32 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 11:26:28 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: Pete Resnick cc: Mark Crispin , ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: > This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that > composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. We > can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode > comparison TR (is it published yet?), or make some attempt to specify > whether you compare maximally composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. > I am agnostic about which of the latter two we choose. Well, if the feeling is that servers should just punt on this for now, can we leave it up to the client to handle this? I.e. the client can build its own equivelence classes using grouping and logical OR. One could argue that the client has the best information on the user's overall language environment, and therefore is in the best position to define equivalences. --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id CAA14149 for ietf-imapext-bks; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:17:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com [155.208.254.68]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id CAA14141 for ; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 02:17:19 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpopd.pwd.hp.com (hpopd.pwd.hp.com [15.145.205.59]) by bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 05CFC1CE05; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 11:22:14 +0200 (METDST) Received: from pwd.hp.com (IDENT:jch@ilex.pwd.hp.com [15.145.204.106]) by hpopd.pwd.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3 SMKit7.01 OpenMail) with ESMTP id KAA09301; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:22:13 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <39EC1A44.2A03E00C@pwd.hp.com> Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 10:22:12 +0100 From: John Haxby Organization: OpenMail R&D X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test9 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin Cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 References: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Mark Crispin wrote: > [...] Note as well that "alnum" > and "alpha" are hopelessly west-Europe specific. You're far more likely to be right in this regard than I am, but I thought that [:alpha:] was defined as those (unicode) characters that are letters, that would include á (a-acute), æ (ae-ligature) and Japanese ideograms and phonetic symbols, but exclude £ (sterling), for example. This is taken from the implementation of character classes in Tcl 8.3 which, so far as I know, uses standard (16bit) unicode tables. jch --------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026 Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="jch.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for John Haxby Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="jch.vcf" begin:vcard n:Haxby;John tel;fax:+44 1344 763686 tel;work:+44 1344 763711 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:https://ecardfile.com/id/jch org:OpenMail R&D adr:;;Nine Mile Ride;Wokingham;Berks;RG40 3LL;England version:2.1 email;internet:john_haxby@hp.com note: x-mozilla-cpt:;-18560 fn:John Haxby end:vcard --------------359C81610C27CB921DA44026-- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id WAA08637 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:35:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (SMTP5.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.85]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id WAA08633 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 22:35:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from penguin.andrew.cmu.edu (PENGUIN.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.122.2]) (authenticated as leg with KERBEROS_V4 (56 bits)) by smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9H5drG03498; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:39:54 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 01:39:54 -0400 Message-Id: <200010170539.e9H5drG03498@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> From: Lawrence Greenfield X-Mailer: BatIMail version 3.2 To: ietf-imapext@imc.org, Lyndon Nerenberg In-reply-to: Subject: Re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:14:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg When searching against the BODY, the anchors match the start and end of individual text lines. In the absence of an anchor should a wildcard match across line boundaries? I think it should, since it is possible to constrain a match within a single line through the use of anchors if that behaviour is desired. However unconstrained searches could exhaust the resources of an implementation (e.g., 'SEARCH REGEXP BODY "a.*a"' against a 200 Mbyte message that happens to start and end with the character 'a'). We could allow these to fail (NO) with a specific response code. [If we allow bounded repetitions then it would be possible to constrain the match to be within a certain number of characters. I doubt it's worth the added complexity.] Regular expressions take constant space to match, since they're equivalent to DFAs. (Well, standard regular expressions; Perl regular expressions aren't really regular expressions and can be arbitrarily complex to evaluate.) All halfway decent implementations sue constant space; this shouldn't be a concern. Larry Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA02904 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:48:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.17] (ip17.proper.com [165.227.249.17]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA02898; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:48:41 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:53:41 -0700 To: Pete Resnick , Mark Crispin From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: At 6:01 PM -0500 10/16/00, Pete Resnick wrote: >We can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode >comparison TR (is it published yet?), No. It is published (UTS 6), but it only gives a framework for comparisons. You then have to specify your local collation hooks. In other words, don't even think about it. > or make some attempt to specify whether you compare maximally >composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. I am agnostic about which of >the latter two we choose. If you go this route, you should follow UAX 15 and choose form C. It makes much more sense than decomposed, for the reasons that they give in the document. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id SAA02581 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:36:56 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout2.cac.washington.edu (mxout2.cac.washington.edu [140.142.33.4]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id SAA02573 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:36:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout2.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id SAA07400; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:41:52 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (bill@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id SAA30779; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:41:52 -0700 Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:18:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Pete Resnick cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:01:38 -0500, Pete Resnick wrote: > This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that > composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. That's correct. That's the status quo for IMAP searches. > We > can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode > comparison TR (is it published yet?), or make some attempt to specify > whether you compare maximally composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. > I am agnostic about which of the latter two we choose. Careful. Refer to section 3.9 of the Unicode Standard to see what this entails, paying particular attention to the text about combining classes and canonical ordering. UW doesn't do anything with composed vs. decomposed characters. Cyrus flushes combining diacritical marks (right for some languages, wrong for others). Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA28479 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:58:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme-software.com (presnick-fw.flexabit.net [64.198.230.34]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA28475 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:58:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from presnick-35.flexabit.net (64.198.230.35) by episteme-software.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.2a2); Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:01:24 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: resnick@resnick1.qualcomm.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 5.0b25-09.00] Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 18:01:38 -0500 To: Mark Crispin From: Pete Resnick Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Cc: Lyndon Nerenberg , ietf-imapext@imc.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On 10/16/00 at 3:02 PM -0700, Mark Crispin wrote: > All other characters are compared > according to their octet values, as expressed in UTF-8. No attempt > is made to treat composed characters specially, or to do > case-insensitive comparisons of composed characters. This also means (unless we put in language to the contrary) that composed characters will not match their decomposed equivalent. We can either ignore that (bad), make some reference to the Unicode comparison TR (is it published yet?), or make some attempt to specify whether you compare maximally composed or maximally decomposed UTF-8. I am agnostic about which of the latter two we choose. pr -- Pete Resnick Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA27798 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (groves@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA27794 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:01 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:02:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 16:01:48 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Okay, I'm convinced. Let's leave classes out. We can deal with it if/when > LANGUAGE ever resolves itself. I thought that would be the outcome! :-) That probably also means punting on ranges outside of ASCII. A way to avoid this would be to declare that the REGEX strings must be UTF-8, and require that non-ASCII ranges be interpreted according to Unicode. Otherwise, you need charset-dependent interpretation of the regex strings in order to interpret the ranges correctly, and character-dependent range checking of the strings being searched. Many (most? all?) IMAP servers that do multi-charset searching implement it by canonicalizing everything into UTF-8, and then doing the search. Server implementors would probably want to do the same for REGEX, but we can't if we have to preserve charset-specific ranging. The easiest punt is to say "octets". There's also precedent (some would say dishonorable precedent). This takes advantage of the fact that, unlike most other multi-byte encodings, an octet search will work correctly for UTF-8. The downside is that this adds to the list of i18n problems that LANGUAGE (or whatever) has to solve. There is a possibility that server implementors will be faced with a choice of REGEX or i18n but not both. We'll need an i18n considerations section to outline the decisions. Suggest something like the following, which is hacked from the SORT and THREAD documents: Internationalization Considerations By default, strings are compared according to the "minimum comparison algorithm". All implementations of REGEX MUST implement the minimum comparison algorithm. In the minimum comparison algorithm, the Basic Latin alphabetics (U+0041 to U+005A uppercase, U+0061 to U+007A lowercase) are compared in a case-insensitive fashion; that is, "A" (U+0041) and "a" (U+0061) are treated as exact equals. All other characters are compared according to their octet values, as expressed in UTF-8. No attempt is made to treat composed characters specially, or to do case-insensitive comparisons of composed characters. Note: this means, among other things, that the composed characters in the Latin-1 Supplement are not compared in what would be considered an ISO 8859-1 "case-insensitive" fashion. Case comparison rules for characters with diacriticals differ between languages; the minimum comparison does not attempt to deal with this at all. This is reserved for other comparons, which may be language-specific. Other comparisons, and the ability to change the comparison, will be defined in a separate document dealing with IMAP internationalization. It is anticipated that there will be a generic Unicode comparison, which will provide generic case-insensitivity for alphabetic scripts, specification of composed character handling, and language-specific comparison. A server which implements non-default comparisons will modify its comparison behavior according to the selected comparison. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA27447 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:57:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA27443 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:57:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9GM1mE01230; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 16:01:48 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 16:01:48 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: Mark Crispin cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Okay, I'm convinced. Let's leave classes out. We can deal with it if/when LANGUAGE ever resolves itself. --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA26924 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:38:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (rodriguez@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA26919 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:38:27 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:23:01 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:33 -0600 (MDT), Lyndon Nerenberg wrote: > Since the classes are simple aliases we could certainly live without > them. However the representation of classes is useful enough that I would > prefer to have the semantics well defined on the server side rather than > being a black-box in the client. OK, so far as that goes... > I also think it's much more likely that > we'll see a greater range of charsets and locales being made available if > it's a server-side implementation. That means that REGEX needs to define what is meant by a "character". It is definitely not what IMAP calls a "CHAR" or a "CHAR8", since these are tied to a single octet. Defining character as "Unicode character" may be better, but then we get into questions of equivalent sequences including precomposed characters (refer to page 2-9 of the Unicode standard). How deeply do we go down this rathole? Remember, the existing IMAP search didn't solve this problem. It dodged it. But you're standing right out in the line of fire when you start mentioning charsets and locales. > (My rationale here is that POSIX > mandates a minimum set of character classes, and servers are likely to be > implemented in a POSIX environment, thus the functionality will already be > available.) There's a danger here; implementors may be tempted to call the local C library implementation of recmp() rather than implementing according to the specification. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA26307 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:13:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA26302 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 14:13:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9GLIXE01017; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:33 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 15:18:33 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: Mark Crispin cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Mon, 16 Oct 2000, Mark Crispin wrote: > Lyndon's comment about character classes frightens me. Classes are not in the > current draft. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be, but there are some big > pitfalls from going there. They're not just charset-specific, they're also > language-specific and perhaps also locale-specific. Note as well that "alnum" > and "alpha" are hopelessly west-Europe specific. Since the classes are simple aliases we could certainly live without them. However the representation of classes is useful enough that I would prefer to have the semantics well defined on the server side rather than being a black-box in the client. I also think it's much more likely that we'll see a greater range of charsets and locales being made available if it's a server-side implementation. (My rationale here is that POSIX mandates a minimum set of character classes, and servers are likely to be implemented in a POSIX environment, thus the functionality will already be available.) --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA24549 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:19:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (gibb@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA24540 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:19:39 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:06:50 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 To: Lyndon Nerenberg cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: I agree with most of Lyndon's comments, particularly the ones about how it must be possible to fully implement REGEXP using only the RFC and his suggestion for a single REGEXP qualifier to switch the interpretation of all astrings in the search. Lyndon's comment about character classes frightens me. Classes are not in the current draft. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be, but there are some big pitfalls from going there. They're not just charset-specific, they're also language-specific and perhaps also locale-specific. Note as well that "alnum" and "alpha" are hopelessly west-Europe specific. I also suggest that the "a.*a" problem get examined carefully. Individual implementors should not be obliged to guess and hope that they guess right. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA22327 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 12:09:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from gollum.esys.ca (dhcp198-59.esys.ca [198.161.92.59]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA22323 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 12:09:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by gollum.esys.ca (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9GJEAE00791 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:14:18 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from lyndon@messagingdirect.com) Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 13:14:10 -0600 (MDT) From: Lyndon Nerenberg X-Sender: lyndon@gollum.esys.ca To: ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: Comments on draft-ietf-imapext-regex-00 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: GENERAL ------- The terms REGEX and REGEXP are used inconsistently. We need to support POSIX extended regexps for grouping and logical OR. The presumption is that regexp searches continue to be case- insensitive. This should be called out explicitly so there is no confusion. We need to call out that character ranges ([a-z]) are in the context of the current charset. An implementation MUST fail a REGEXP search with a range ([a-z]) or class ([:alpha:]) if it cannot interpret these within the context of the current charset. [NO with [BADCHARSET] as proposed in Mark's imapv draft? Or a seperate response code specific to REGEXP not being able to handle the character class within the context of the charset? Or do we mandate that supporting a charset in the presence of REGEXP requires that the classes be fully supported in order to advertise that charset? There's an potential ambiguity here in the failure modes for SEARCH vs. SEARCH REGEXP. ] Which classes do we support? I think the minimum useful set is: alnum, alpha, digit, space. [Are graph and punct useful here?] REGEXP SYNTAX ------------- The syntax should be that of POSIX regular expressions with the following exceptions: * no backtracking * no bounded repetitions * no equivalence classes Character classes MUST be interpreted in the context of the current charset. The syntax and behaviour of the regexps needs to be called out explicitly in the RFC. There are ambiguities in the POSIX spec that must be clarified in the RFC. We cannot reference a POSIX spec. It must be possible to fully implement REGEXP using only the RFC. How do we specify the syntax of regexp's in the RFC? Ditto for the behaviour of the regexp's. The syntax can probably be represented in the ABNF, however the semantics will require prose. IMAP SYNTAX ----------- Rather than modifying I would prefer to modify itself: search ::= "SEARCH" SPACE ["CHARSET" SPACE astring SPACE] ["REGEXP" SPACE] 1#search_key ;; [CHARSET] MUST be registered with IANA REGEXP switches the interpretation of all in the syntax to be regexps. It eliminates the "sillyness" described in section 4 of the draft. Any existing (RFC2060) can be represented as an REGEXP encoded . REGEXP ANCHORS -------------- To be useful, anchors need to be context sensitive. I would like to propose the following behaviour. In header fields, the anchors match the start and end of the contents of the header field-body, ignoring any newline folding. For example, given the header field: Subject: This is a line-wrapped subject header. SEARCH REGEXP SUBJECT "line-wrapped.*$" would match. SEARCH REGEXP SUBJECT "line-wrapped$" would NOT match. Note that [:space:] matches on CR, LF, and TAB, therefore the line-break in the header can be treated as whitespace. [Should the CRLF line termination in the multi-line header be visible for matching purposes? A folded header will always have an HT or SP following the CRLF.] When searching against the BODY, the anchors match the start and end of individual text lines. In the absence of an anchor should a wildcard match across line boundaries? I think it should, since it is possible to constrain a match within a single line through the use of anchors if that behaviour is desired. However unconstrained searches could exhaust the resources of an implementation (e.g., 'SEARCH REGEXP BODY "a.*a"' against a 200 Mbyte message that happens to start and end with the character 'a'). We could allow these to fail (NO) with a specific response code. [If we allow bounded repetitions then it would be possible to constrain the match to be within a certain number of characters. I doubt it's worth the added complexity.] --lyndon Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id BAA20281 for ietf-imapext-bks; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 01:26:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com [155.208.254.68]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA20263 for ; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 01:26:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from hpopd.pwd.hp.com (hpopd.pwd.hp.com [15.145.205.59]) by bbnrel4.net.external.hp.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAB041BBCC; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 10:31:05 +0200 (METDST) Received: from pwd.hp.com (IDENT:jch@ilex.pwd.hp.com [15.145.204.106]) by hpopd.pwd.hp.com (8.9.3/8.9.3 SMKit7.01 OpenMail) with ESMTP id JAA15547; Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:31:02 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <39EABCC2.BD2E4D27@pwd.hp.com> Date: Mon, 16 Oct 2000 09:30:58 +0100 From: John Haxby Organization: OpenMail R&D X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.75 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.0-test9 i686) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin Cc: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY References: Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mark Crispin wrote: > I am thinking about reducing the number of RTTs in a typical IMAP session. > Can anyone come up with a good reason why these should NOT be added to IMAP. > I don't believe that the time taken for the extra commands is significant compared to the time taken to create a new session; that is, it is dwarfed by the time taken to set up a new process, read in configuration settings, check authentication, etc etc. Have you, or anyone else, measured this and compared it to the time taken to turn around a CAPABILITY request? If you're concerned about turnaround time, then you should also state the underlying network latencies that you are assuming. jch --------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF Content-Type: text/x-vcard; charset=us-ascii; name="jch.vcf" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Description: Card for John Haxby Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="jch.vcf" begin:vcard n:Haxby;John tel;fax:+44 1344 763686 tel;work:+44 1344 763711 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:https://ecardfile.com/id/jch org:OpenMail R&D adr:;;Nine Mile Ride;Wokingham;Berks;RG40 3LL;England version:2.1 email;internet:john_haxby@hp.com note: x-mozilla-cpt:;-18560 fn:John Haxby end:vcard --------------1E9BB00D721CEFF7ACE8FEEF-- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA04425 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:21:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from episteme-software.com (presnick-fw.flexabit.net [64.198.230.34]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA04421 for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 14:21:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from presnick-35.flexabit.net (64.198.230.35) by episteme-software.com with ESMTP (Eudora Internet Mail Server 3.0.2a2); Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:15:53 -0500 Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: resnick@resnick1.qualcomm.com (Unverified) Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: X-Mailer: Eudora [Macintosh version 5.0b25-09.00] Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 13:16:03 -0500 To: Mark Crispin From: Pete Resnick Subject: Re: imapext list needs moderation Cc: IMAP Extensions WG Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On 10/15/00 at 11:01 AM -0700, Mark Crispin wrote: >At the very least, it needs to limit postings to list members. It's >getting really old to see the same pyramid scheme spam twice in under 24 >hours. I'd prefer moderation to limiting posting. I'll talk to Paul about it. pr -- Pete Resnick Eudora Engineering - QUALCOMM Incorporated Ph: (217)337-6377 or (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA02998 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:18:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [165.227.249.17] (ip17.proper.com [165.227.249.17]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA02993; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:18:29 -0700 (PDT) Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Sender: phoffman@mail.imc.org Message-Id: In-Reply-To: References: Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 12:23:24 -0700 To: Mark Crispin , IMAP Extensions WG From: Paul Hoffman / IMC Subject: Re: imapext list needs moderation Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: At 11:01 AM -0700 10/15/00, Mark Crispin wrote: >At the very least, it needs to limit postings to list members. It's >getting really old to see the same pyramid scheme spam twice in under 24 >hours. This is the mailing list for an IETF WG. As a rule, such mailing lists should only be moderated if there are too many off-topic postings (as determined by the WG chair) or the spam level is getting in the way of productive work. "Getting really old" doesn't qualify for the latter for me, but it might for others. If Pete wants me to make this a moderated list, I can do so, but I propose that people instead just put up with the minor amount of spam and use it as a lesson in the problems we still have to face in the Internet mail industry. Prediction: the number of messages talking about the spam problem on this list will quickly be larger than the number of spam messages on the list. --Paul Hoffman, Director --Internet Mail Consortium Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA02297 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:56:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (bcn@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA02293 for ; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 10:56:33 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 11:01:26 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin To: IMAP Extensions WG Subject: imapext list needs moderation Message-ID: Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: At the very least, it needs to limit postings to list members. It's getting really old to see the same pyramid scheme spam twice in under 24 hours. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA01196 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 09:43:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from edith.3dgrafika.cz (IDENT:root@[194.228.3.166]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA01185; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 09:43:41 -0700 (PDT) From: sst@bemberg.de Received: from oemcomputer (1Cust6.tnt1.chi1.da.uu.net [63.20.221.6]) by edith.3dgrafika.cz (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id SAA18361; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 18:52:15 +0200 Date: Sun, 15 Oct 2000 18:52:15 +0200 Message-Id: <200010151652.SAA18361@edith.3dgrafika.cz> To: sst@bemberg.de Subject: Earn $50,000 in 90 Days! It Really Works! It worked so well the first time, I'm doing it again! MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=unknown-8bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Dear Friend, You can earn $50,000 or more in next the 90 days sending e-mail. Seem impossible? Read on for details; is there a catch; NO, there is no catch, just send your emails and be on your way to financial freedom. "AS SEEN ON NATIONAL TELEVISION" Thank you for your time and Interest. This is the letter you've been reading about in the news lately. Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program described below to see, if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved once and for all that there are, absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results of this show have been truly remarkable. So many people are participating that those involved are doing, much better than ever before. Since everyone makes more as more people try it out, its been very exciting to be a part of lately. You will understand once you experience it. "HERE IT IS BELOW" ================================================ *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** The following income opportunity is one you may be interested in taking a look at. It can be started with VERY LITTLE investment and the income return is TREMENDOUS!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read the enclosed program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY. It does not require you to come into contact with people, do any hard work, and best of all, you never have to leave the house except to get the mail. If you believe that someday you'll get that big break that you've been waiting for, THIS IS IT! Simply follow the instructions, and your dreams will come true. This Multi-level e-mail order marketing program works perfectly 100% EVERY TIME. E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this non-commercialized method of advertising NOW! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using e-mail. Get your piece of this action !!! MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING (MLM) has finally gained respectability. It is being taught in the Harvard Business School, and both Stanford Research and the Wall Street Journal have stated that between 50% and 65% of all goods and services will be sold through multi-level methods by the mid to late 1990's. This is a Multi-Billion Dollar industry and of the 500,000 millionaires in the U.S., 20% (100,000) made their fortune in the last several years in MLM. Moreover, statistics show 45people become millionaires everyday through Multi-Level Marketing. You may have heard this story before, but over the summer Donald Trump made an appearance on the David Letterman show. Dave asked him what he would do if he lost everything and had to start over from scratch. Without hesitating, Trump said he would find a good network marketing company and get to work. The audience started to hoot and boo him. He looked out at the audience and dead-panned his response "That's why I'm sitting up here and you are all sitting out there!" With network marketing you have two sources of income. Direct commissions from sales you make yourself and commissions from sales made by people you introduce to the business. Residual income is the secret of the wealthy. It means investing time or money once and getting paid again and again and again. In network marketing, it also means getting paid for the work of others. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. My name is Jonathan Rourke. Two years ago, the corporation I worked at for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life and I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this will change your life FOREVER FINANCIALLY!!! In mid December, I received this program via e-mail. Six month's prior to receiving this program, I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work or not. One claimed that I would make a million dollars in one year... it didn't tell me I'd have to write a book to make it! But like I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT !!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly, I couldn't believe my eyes. Here was a MONEY MAKING PHENOMENON. I could invest as much as I wanted to start, without putting me further into debt. After I got a pencil and paper and figured it out, I would at least get my money back. But like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL and NOT A CHAIN LETTER, I decided "WHY NOT." Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don't need any money for printing to send out the program, and because all of my orders are fulfilled via e-mail, the only expense is my time. I am telling you like it is, I hope it doesn't turn you off, but I promised myself that I would not "rip-off" anyone, no matter how much money it cost me. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO!" My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2, 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 10,000, I received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car. Please take time to read the attached program, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER!!! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work, you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and are if financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! Sincerely, Jonathan Rourke PS Do you have any idea what 11,700 $5 bills ($58,000) look like piled up on a kitchen table? IT'S AWESOME! A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate...because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to "move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have already made over 4 MILLION DOLLARS! I have retired from the program after sending out over 16,000 programs. Now I have several offices that make this and several other programs here and over seas. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on everyone of them! Remember though, the more you send out the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent, IT IS UP TO YOU NOW! ************************************************************ "THINK ABOUT IT" Before you delete this program from your mailbox, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. IT WORKS! Jody Jacobs, Richmond, VA ************************************************************ HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLAR$ INSTRUCTIONS: This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. Before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making opportunity. Basically, this is what you do: As with all multi-level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we offer a product for EVERY dollar sent. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the GREATEST Multi-Level Mail Order Marketing anywhere: This is what you MUST do: 1. Order all 4 reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). * For each report, send $5.00 CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL AND ADDRESS, YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) and to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! * When you place your order, make sure you order each of the four reports. You will need all four reports so that you can save them on your computer and resell them. * Within a few days you will receive, via e-mail, each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so they will be accessible for you to send to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. 2. IMPORTANT-- DO NOT alter the names of the people who are listed next to each report, or their sequence on the list, in any way other than is instructed below in steps "a" through "f" or you will lose out on the majority of your profits. Once you understand the way this works, you'll also see how it doesn't work if you change it. Remember, this method has been tested, and if you alter it, it will not work. a. Look below for the listing of available reports. b. After you've ordered the four reports, take this Advertisement and remove the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle and is no doubt counting their $50,000! c. Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d. Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e. Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f. Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you copy every name and address ACCURATELY! 3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to the Instruction portion of this letter. Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $20). You obviously already have an Internet Connection and e-mail is FREE! To assist you with marketing your business on the internet, the 4 reports you purchase will provide you with invaluable marketing information which includes how to send bulk e-mails, where to find thousands of free classified ads and much, much more. There are two primary methods of building your downline: METHOD #1: SENDING BULK E-MAIL Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume you and all those involved send out only 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a 0.5% response. Using a good list the response could be much better. Also, many people will send out hundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000. But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 0.5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 0.5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The 0.5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The 0.5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 $5 bills for you. CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5,000+ $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF THE 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF 2,000. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! By the way, your cost to participate in this is practically nothing. You obviously already have an internet connection and e-mail is FREE !!! REPORT #2 will show you the best methods for bulk e-mailing, tell you where to obtain free bulk e-mail software and where to obtain e-mail lists. METHOD #2 - PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET 1. Advertising on the 'Net is very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get ONLY 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Follow this example to achieve the STAGGERING results below: 1st level-your 10 members with $5.........$50 2nd level-10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100).......$500 3rd level-10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000) $5,000 4th level-10 members from those 1,000 ($5 x 10k) $50,000 THIS TOTALS ---------------------------$55,550 Remember friends, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Most people get 100's of participants! THINK ABOUT IT! For every $5.00 you receive, all you must do is e-mail them the report they ordered. THAT'S IT! ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out, with YOUR name and address on it, will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! ------------------------------------------ AVAILABLE REPORTS ------------------------------------------ *** Order Each REPORT by NUMBER and NAME *** Notes: - ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH (U.S. CURRENCY) FOR EACH REPORT CHEQUES NOT ACCEPTED - ALWAYS SEND YOUR ORDER VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL - Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in at least two sheets of paper (IF NOT MORE SO THAT THE BILL CAN'T BE SEEN AGAINST LIGHT) - On one of those sheets of paper, include: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering, (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your name & postal address (as return address in case the post office encounters problems). PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THESE REPORTS NOW: ______________________________________________________ REPORT #1 "The Insider's Guide to Advertising for Free on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: Doug Teasdale 619 Hamilton unit C Costa Mesa, CA 92627 ______________________________________________________ REPORT #2 "The Insider's Guide to Sending Bulk E-mail on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: C.R. Kneeland %P.O. Box 94 Prather, CA 93651 ______________________________________________________ REPORT #3 "The Secrets to Multilevel Marketing on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: David Robinson 43000 W Nine Mile Rd Novi, MI 48375 ______________________________________________________ REPORT #4 "How to become a Millionaire utilizing the Power of Multilevel Marketing and the Internet" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Sam Laan Box 25362,395 Wellington Rd South London, ON Canada N6C 6B1 ______________________________________________________ About 50,000 new people get online every month! ******* TIPS FOR SUCCESS ******* * TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. * Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product/report. * ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. * Be patient and persistent with this program. If you follow the instructions exactly, your results WILL BE SUCCESSFUL! * ABOVE ALL, HAVE FAITH IN YOURSELF AND KNOW YOU WILL SUCCEED! ******* YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES ******* Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you don't receive 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT#2. If you don't, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash will continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. If you want to generate more income, send another batch of e-mails or continue placing ads and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! Before you make your decision as to whether or not you participate in this program. Please answer one question..... DO YOU WANT TO CHANGE YOUR LIFE? If the answer is yes, please look at the following facts about this program: 1. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT WHICH DOES NOT COST ANYTHING TO PRODUCE! 2. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT WHICH DOES NOT COST ANYTHING TO SHIP! 3. YOU ARE SELLING A PRODUCT WHICH DOES NOT COST YOU ANYTHING TO ADVERTISE! 4. YOU ARE UTILIZING THE POWER OF THE INTERNET AND THE POWER OF MULTI-LEVEL MARKETING TO DISTRIBUTE YOUR PRODUCT ALL OVER THE WORLD! 5. YOUR ONLY EXPENSES OTHER THAN YOUR INITIAL $20 INVESTMENT IS YOUR TIME! 6. VIRTUALLY ALL OF THE INCOME YOU GENERATE FROM THIS PROGRAM IS PURE PROFIT! 7. THIS PROGRAM WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER. ******* T E S T I M O N I A L S ******* This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rule of not trying to place your name in a different position, it won't work and you'll lose a lot of potential income. I'm living proof that it works. It really is a great opportunity to make relatively easy money, with little cost to you. If you do choose to participate, follow the program exactly, and you'll be on your way to financial security. Steven Bardfield, Portland, OR ************************************************************ My name is Mitchell. My wife, Jody, and I live in Chicago, IL. I am a cost accountant with a major U.S. Corporation and I make pretty good money. When I received the program I grumbled to Jody about receiving "junk mail." I made fun of the whole thing, spouting my knowledge of the population and percentages involved. I "knew" it wouldn't work. Jody totally ignored my supposed intelligence and jumped in with both feet. I made merciless fun of her, and was ready to lay the old "I told you so" on her when the thing didn't work... well, the laugh was on me! Within two weeks she had received over 50 responses. Within 45 days she had received over $147,200 in $5 bills! I was shocked! I was sure that I had it all figured and that it wouldn't work. I AM a believer now. I have joined Jody in her "hobby." I did have seven more years until retirement, but I think of the "rat race" and it's not for me. We owe it all to MLM. Mitchell Wolf MD., Chicago, IL ************************************************************ The main reason for this letter is to convince you that this system is honest, lawful, extremely profitable, and is a way to get a large amount of money in a short time. I was approached several times before I checked this out. I joined just to see what one could expect in return for the minimal effort and money required. To my astonishment, I received $36,470.00 in the first 14 weeks, with money still coming in. Charles Morris, Esq. ************************************************************ Not being the gambling type, it took me several weeks to make up my mind to participate in this plan. But conservative that I am, I decided that the initial investment was so little that there was just no way that I wouldn't get enough orders to at least get my money back. Boy, was I surprised when I found my medium-size post office box crammed with orders! For awhile, it got so overloaded that I had to start picking up my mail at the window. I'll make more money this year than any 10 years of my life before. The nice thing about this deal is that it doesn't matter where people live. There simply isn't a better investment with a faster return. Paige Willis, Des Moines, IA ************************************************************ I had received this program before. I deleted it, but later I wondered if I shouldn't have given it a try. Of course, I had no idea who to contact to get another copy, so I had to wait until I was e-mailed another program, .11 months passed then it came...I didn't delete this one!...I made more than $41,000 on the first try!! Violet Wilson, Johnstown, PA *********************************************************** This is my third time to participate in this plan. We have quit our jobs, and will soon buy a home on the beach and live off the interest on our money. The only way on earth that this plan will work for you is if you do it. For your sake, and for your family's sake don't pass up this golden opportunity. Good luck and happy spending! Kerry Ford, Centerport, NY ************************************************************ ORDER YOUR REPORTS TODAY AND GET STARTED ON YOUR ROAD TO FINANCIAL FREEDOM! NOW IS THE TIME FOR YOUR TURN DECISIVE ACTION YIELDS POWERFUL RESULTS _______________________________________________________ FOR YOUR INFORMATION.... If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal agency) 1-(800)827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax requirements. If you have any question of the legality of this letter contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices Federal Trade Commission Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington DC. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id TAA10703 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:29:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: from exchange_01.wilsondd.com (mail.wilsondd.com [62.172.104.90]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id TAA10608; Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:26:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2000 19:26:38 -0700 (PDT) From: paul@bourgeat.fr Message-Id: <200010150226.TAA10608@ns.secondary.com> Received: from alli (ip62.schiller-park9.il.pub-ip.psi.net [38.31.126.62]) by exchange_01.wilsondd.com with SMTP (Microsoft Exchange Internet Mail Service Version 5.5.2650.21) id T8LV5HD0; Sun, 15 Oct 2000 03:25:32 +0100 To: paul@bourgeat.fr Subject: Truly Earn $50,000 in 90 Days! It Works! Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Dear Friend, This really works! Have the faith, don't miss this opportunity, get involved also, and it will work for you as it does for us!!!!! Thank you for your time and interest. This email contains the ENTIRE PLAN of how YOU can make $50,000 or more in the next 90 days simply sending email! Seem impossible? Just read on and see how easy this is.... Due to the popularity of this letter on the Internet, a major nightly news program recently devoted an entire show to the investigation of the program described below to see if it really can make people money. The show also investigated whether or not the program was legal. Their findings proved that there are absolutely no laws prohibiting the participation in the program. This has helped to show people that this is a simple, harmless and fun way to make some extra money at home. The results have been truly remarkable. So many people are participating that those involved are doing much better than ever before. Since everyone makes more as more people try it out, its been very exciting. You will understand once you try it yourself! ********* THE ENTIRE PLAN IS HERE BELOW ********* *** Print This Now For Future Reference *** $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ If you would like to make at least $50,000 in less than 90 days! Please read this program...THEN READ IT AGAIN!! $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ THIS IS A LEGITIMATE, LEGAL, MONEY MAKING OPPORTUNITY!! It does NOT require you to come into contact with people or make or take any telephone calls. Just follow the instructions, and you will make money. This simplified e-mail marketing program works perfectly 100% EVERY TIME! E-mail is the sales tool of the future. Take advantage of this virtually free method of advertising NOW!!! The longer you wait, the more people will be doing business using email. Get your piece of this action!!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Hello - My name is Johnathon Rourke, I'm from Rhode Island. The enclosed information is something I almost let slip through my fingers. Fortunately, sometime later I re-read everything and gave some thought and study to it. Two years ago, the corporation I worked for the past twelve years down-sized and my position was eliminated. After unproductive job interviews, I decided to open my own business. Over the past year, I incurred many unforeseen financial problems. I owed my family, friends and creditors over $35,000. The economy was taking a toll on my business and I just couldn't seem to make ends meet. I had to refinance and borrow against my home to support my family and struggling business. AT THAT MOMENT something significant happened in my life. I am writing to share the experience in hopes that this could change your life FOREVER. FINANCIALLY$$$!!! In mid December, I received this program in my e-mail. Six months prior to receiving this program I had been sending away for information on various business opportunities. All of the programs I received, in my opinion, were not cost effective. They were either too difficult for me to comprehend or the initial investment was too much for me to risk to see if they would work. But as I was saying, in December of 1997 I received this program. I didn't send for it, or ask for it, they just got my name off a mailing list. THANK GOODNESS FOR THAT!!! After reading it several times, to make sure I was reading it correctly. I couldn't believe my eyes! Here was a MONEY MAKING MACHINE I could start immediately without any debt. Like most of you I was still a little skeptical and a little worried about the legal aspects of it all. So I checked it out with the U.S. Post Office (1-800-725-2161 24-hrs) and they confirmed that it is indeed legal! After determining the program was LEGAL I decided "WHY NOT!?!??" Initially I sent out 10,000 e-mails. It cost me about $15 for my time on-line. The great thing about e-mail is that I don't need any for printing to send out the program, and because I also send the product (reports) by e-mail, my only expense is my time. In less than one week, I was starting to receive orders for REPORT #1. By January 13, I had received 26 orders for REPORT #1. Your goal is to "RECEIVE at least 20 ORDERS FOR REPORT #1 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF YOU DON'T, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. My first step in making $50,000 in 90 days was done. By January 30, I had received 196 orders for REPORT #2. Your goal is to "RECEIVE AT LEAST 100+ ORDERS FOR REPORT #2 WITHIN 2 WEEKS. IF NOT, SEND OUT MORE PROGRAMS UNTIL YOU DO. ONCE YOU HAVE 100 ORDERS, THE REST IS EASY, RELAX, YOU WILL MAKE YOUR $50,000 GOAL." Well, I had 196 orders for REPORT #2. 96 more than I needed. So I sat back and relaxed. By March 1, of my e-mailing of 10,000, received $58,000 with more coming in every day. I paid off ALL my debts and bought a much needed new car! Please take your time to read this plan, IT WILL CHANGE YOUR LIFE FOREVER$!!! Remember, it won't work if you don't try it. This program does work, but you must follow it EXACTLY! Especially the rules of not trying to place your name in a different place. It won't work and you'll lose out on a lot of money! In order for this program to work, you must meet your goal of 20+ orders for REPORT #1, and 100+ orders for REPORT #2 and you will make $50,000 or more in 90 days. I AM LIVING PROOF THAT IT WORKS!!! If you choose not to participate in this program, I am sorry. It really is a great opportunity with little cost or risk to you. If you choose to participate, follow the program and you will be on your way to financial security. If you are a fellow business owner and are in financial trouble like I was, or you want to start your own business, consider this a sign. I DID! $$ Sincerely, Johnathon Rourke ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ A PERSONAL NOTE FROM THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS PROGRAM: By the time you have read the enclosed program and reports, you should have concluded that such a program, and one that is legal, could not have been created by an amateur. Let me tell you a little about myself. I had a profitable business for 10 years. Then in 1979 my business began falling off. I was doing the same things that were previously successful for me, but it wasn't working. Finally, I figured it out. It wasn't me, it was the economy. Inflation and recession had replaced the stable economy that had been with us since 1945. I don't have to tell you what happened to the unemployment rate... because many of you know from first hand experience. There were more failures and bankruptcies than ever before. The middle class was vanishing. Those who knew what they were doing invested wisely and moved up. Those who did not, including those who never had anything to save or invest, were moving down into the ranks of the poor. As the saying goes, "THE RICH GET RICHER AND THE POOR GET POORER." The traditional methods of making money will never allow you to"move up" or "get rich", inflation will see to that. You have just received information that can give you financial freedom for the rest of your life, with "NO RISK" and "JUST A LITTLE BIT OF EFFORT." You can make more money in the next few months than you have ever imagined. I should also point out that I will not see a penny of this money, nor anyone else who has provided a testimonial for this program. I have retired from the program after sending thousands and thousands of programs. Follow the program EXACTLY AS INSTRUCTED. Do not change it in any way. It works exceedingly well as it is now. Remember to e-mail a copy of this exciting report to everyone you can think of. One of the people you send this to may send out 50,000...and your name will be on everyone of them! Remember though, the more you send out, the more potential customers you will reach. So my friend, I have given you the ideas, information, materials and opportunity to become financially independent. IT IS UP TO YOU!! NOW DO IT!! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Before you delete this program from your in box, as I almost did, take a little time to read it and REALLY THINK ABOUT IT. Get a pencil and figure out what could happen when YOU participate. Figure out the worst possible response and no matter how you calculate it, you will still make a lot of money! You will definitely get back what you invested. Any doubts you have will vanish when your first orders come in. $$$ IT WORKS!!! $$$ Jody Jacobs Richmond, VA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ HERE'S HOW THIS AMAZING PROGRAM WILL MAKE YOU THOUSANDS OF DOLLAR$$$$!!!! This method of raising capital REALLY WORKS 100% EVERY TIME. I am sure that you could use up to $50,000 or more in the next 90 days. before you say "BULL... ", please read this program carefully. This is not a chain letter, but a perfectly legal money making business. As with all multi-level businesses, we build our business by recruiting new partners and selling our products. Every state in the USA allows you to recruit new multi-level business partners, and we sell and deliver a product for EVERY dollar received. YOUR ORDERS COME BY MAIL AND ARE FILLED BY E-MAIL, so you are not involved in personal selling. You do it privately in your own home, store or office. This is the EASIEST marketing plan anywhere! It is simply order filling by email! ******************************************************************* The product is informational and instructional material, keys to the secrets for everyone on how to open the doors to the magic world of E-COMMERCE , the information highway, the wave of the future ! PLAN SUMMARY: (1) You order the 4 reports listed below ($5 each) They come to you by email. (2) Save a copy of this entire letter and put your name after Report #1 and move the other names down. (3) Via the internet, access Yahoo.com or any of the other major search engines to locate hundreds of bulk email service companies (search for "bulk email") and have them send 25,000 - 50,000 emails for you about $49+) (4) Orders will come to you by postal mail - simply email them the Report they ordered. Let me ask you - isn't this about as easy as it gets? ******************************************************************* By the way there are over 50 MILLION email addresses with millions more joining the internet each year so don't worry about "running out" or "saturation". People are used to seeing and hearing the same advertisements every day on radio/TV. How many times have you received the same pizza flyers on your door? Then one day you are hungry for pizza and you order one. Same thing with this letter. I received this letter many times - then one day I decided it was time to try it. ******************************************************************* YOU CAN START TODAY - JUST DO THESE EASY STEPS: STEP #1. ORDER THE FOUR REPORTS Order the four reports shown on the list below (you can't sell them if you don't order them). -- For each report, send $5.00 CASH, the NAME & NUMBER OF THE REPORT YOU ARE ORDERING, YOUR E-MAIL ADDRESS, and YOUR NAME & RETURN ADDRESS (in case of a problem) to the person whose name appears on the list next to the report. MAKE SURE YOUR RETURN ADDRESS IS ON YOUR ENVELOPE IN CASE OF ANY MAIL PROBLEMS! Within a few days you will receive, by e-mail, each of the four reports. Save them on your computer so you can send them to the 1,000's of people who will order them from you. STEP #2. ADD YOUR MAILING ADDRESS TO THIS LETTER a.Look below for the listing of the four reports. b.After you've ordered the four reports, delete the name and address under REPORT #4. This person has made it through the cycle. c.Move the name and address under REPORT #3 down to REPORT #4. d.Move the name and address under REPORT #2 down to REPORT #3. e.Move the name and address under REPORT #1 down to REPORT #2. f.Insert your name/address in the REPORT #1 position. Please make sure you COPY ALL INFORMATION, every name and address, ACCURATELY! STEP #3. Take this entire letter, including the modified list of names, and save it to your computer. Make NO changes to these instructions. Now you are ready to use this entire email to send by email to prospects. Report #1 will tell you how to download bulk email software and email addresses so you can send it out to thousands of people while you sleep! Remember that 50,000+ new people are joining the internet every month. Your cost to participate in this is practically nothing (surely you can afford $20 and initial bulk mailing cost). You obviously already have a computer and an Internet connection and e-mail is FREE! There are two primary methods of building your downline: METHOD #1: SENDING BULK E-MAIL Let's say that you decide to start small, just to see how it goes, and we'll assume you and all those involved email out only 2,000 programs each. Let's also assume that the mailing receives a 0.5% response. The response could be much better. Also, many people will email outhundreds of thousands of programs instead of 2,000 (Why stop at 2000?). But continuing with this example, you send out only 2,000 programs. With a 0.5% response, that is only 10 orders for REPORT #1. Those 10 people respond by sending out 2,000 programs each for a total of 20,000. Out of those 0.5%, 100 people respond and order REPORT #2. Those 100 mail out 2,000 programs each for a total of 200,000. The 0.5% response to that is 1,000 orders for REPORT #3. Those 1,000 send out 2,000 programs each for a 2,000,000 total. The 0.5% response to that is 10,000 orders for REPORT #4. That's 10,000 $5 bills for you. CASH!!! Your total income in this example is $50 + $500 + $5,000 + $50,000 for a total of $55,550!!! REMEMBER FRIEND, THIS IS ASSUMING 1,990 OUT OF THE 2,000 PEOPLE YOU MAIL TO WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AND TRASH THIS PROGRAM! DARE TO THINK FOR A MOMENT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IF EVERYONE, OR HALF SENT OUT 100,000 PROGRAMS INSTEAD OF 2,000. Believe me, many people will do just that, and more! METHOD #2 - PLACING FREE ADS ON THE INTERNET Advertising on the internet is very, very inexpensive, and there are HUNDREDS of FREE places to advertise. Let's say you decide to start small just to see how well it works. Assume your goal is to get ONLY 10 people to participate on your first level. (Placing a lot of FREE ads on the Internet will EASILY get a larger response.) Also assume that everyone else in YOUR ORGANIZATION gets ONLY 10 downline members. Look how this small number accumulates to achieve the STAGGERING results below: 1st level--your first 10 send you $5...........................................................$50 2nd level--10 members from those 10 ($5 x 100).............$500 3rd level--10 members from those 100 ($5 x 1,000)........$5,000 4th level--10 members from those 1,000 ($5 x 10,000)..$50,000 $$$$$$ THIS TOTALS ----------$55,550 $$$$$$ AMAZING ISN'T IT? Remember friends, this assumes that the people who participate only recruit 10 people each. Think for a moment what would happen if they got 20 people to participate! Most people get 100's of participants and many will continue to work this program, sending out programs WITH YOUR NAME ON THEM for years! THINK ABOUT IT! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ People are going to get emails about this plan from you or somebody else and many will work this plan - the question is - Don't you want your name to be on the emails they will send out? * * * DON'T MISS OUT!!! * * * JUST TRY IT ONCE!!! * * * * * SEE WHAT HAPPENS!!! *** YOU'LL BE AMAZED!!!* * ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON ALL ORDERS! This will guarantee that the e-mail THEY send out with YOUR name and address on it will be prompt because they can't advertise until they receive the report! ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ GET STARTED TODAY: PLACE YOUR ORDER FOR THE FOUR REPORTS NOW. Notes: -- ALWAYS SEND $5 CASH (U.S. CURRENCY) FOR EACH REPORT. CHECKS NOT ACCEPTED. Make sure the cash is concealed by wrapping it in two sheets of paper. On one of those sheets of paper write: (a) the number & name of the report you are ordering (b) your e-mail address, and (c) your name & postal address. REPORT #1 "The Insider's Guide to Advertising for Free on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #1 FROM: John Stitzel 3121 Benninghofen Ave. Hamilton, Ohio 45015 REPORT #2 "The Insider's Guide to Sending Bulk E-mail on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #2 FROM: Lorraine Wride 2350 E. Brower St. Simi Valley, CA 93065 REPORT #3 "The Secrets to Multilevel Marketing on the Internet" ORDER REPORT #3 FROM: Dan Rutherford 1215 Linden Ave. Glendale, CA 91201 REPORT #4 "How to become a Millionaire utilizing the Power of Multilevel Marketing and the Internet" ORDER REPORT #4 FROM: Tina Marie Mitchell 3018 Cottage Grove Court Orlando, FL 32822 ******* TIPS FOR SUCCESS ******* TREAT THIS AS YOUR BUSINESS! Be prompt, professional, and follow the directions accurately. -- Send for the four reports IMMEDIATELY so you will have them when the orders start coming in because: When you receive a $5 order, you MUST send out the requested product/report. It is required for this to be a legal business and they need the reports to send out their letters (with your name on them!) -- ALWAYS PROVIDE SAME-DAY SERVICE ON THE ORDERS YOU RECEIVE. -- Be patient and persistent with this program - If you follow the instructions exactly - results WILL FOLLOW. $$$$ ******* YOUR SUCCESS GUIDELINES ******* Follow these guidelines to guarantee your success: If you don't receive 20 orders for REPORT #1 within two weeks, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Then, a couple of weeks later you should receive at least 100 orders for REPORT#2. If you don't, continue advertising or sending e-mails until you do. Once you have received 100 or more orders for REPORT #2, YOU CAN RELAX, because the system is already working for you, and the cash will continue to roll in! THIS IS IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER: Every time your name is moved down on the list, you are placed in front of a DIFFERENT report. You can KEEP TRACK of your PROGRESS by watching which report people are ordering from you. To generate more income, simply send another batch of e-mails or continue placing ads and start the whole process again! There is no limit to the income you will generate from this business! Before you make your decision as to whether or not you participate in this program. Please answer one question. ARE YOU HAPPY WITH YOUR PRESENT INCOME OR JOB? If the answer is no, then please look at the following facts about this super simple MLM program: 1. NO face to face selling, NO meetings, NO inventory! NO Telephone calls, NO big cost to start!, NOthing to learn, NO skills needed! (Surely you know how to send email?) 2. No equipment to buy - you already have a computer and internet connection - so you have everything you need to fill orders! 3. You are selling a product which does NOT COST ANYTHING TO PRODUCE OR SHIP! (Emailing copies of the reports is FREE!) 4. All of your customers pay you in CA$H! This program will change your LIFE FOREVER!! Look at the potential for you to be able to quit your job and live a life of luxury you could only dream about! Imagine getting out of debt and buying the car and home of your dreams and being able to work a super-high paying leisurely easy business from home! $$$ FINALLY MAKE SOME DREAMS COME TRUE! $$$ ACT NOW! Take your first step toward achieving financial independence. Order the reports and follow the program outlined above-- SUCCESS will be your reward. Thank you for your time and consideration. PLEASE NOTE: If you need help with starting a business, registering a business name, learning how income tax is handled, etc., contact your local office of the Small Business Administration (a Federal Agency) 1-800-827-5722 for free help and answers to questions. Also, the Internal Revenue Service offers free help via telephone and free seminars about business tax reuirements. Your earnings are highly dependent on your activities and advertising. The information contained on this site and in the report constitutes no guarantees stated nor implied. In the event that it is determined that this site or report constitutes a guarantee of any kind, that guarantee is now void. The earnings amounts listed on this site and in the report are estimates only. If you have any questions of the legality of this program, contact the Office of Associate Director for Marketing Practices, Federal Trade Commission, Bureau of Consumer Protection in Washington, DC. ================================================ Under Bill s.1618 TITLE III passed by the 105th US Congress this letter cannot be considered spam as long as the sender includes contact information and a method of removal. This is a one time e-mail transmission. No request for removal is necessary. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05993 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:47:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05988 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:47:35 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (gagarin.esys.ca [198.161.92.84]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9DKqIC25013; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:52:18 -0600 Message-ID: <39E775FE.9FA2FAB3@messagingdirect.com> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:52:17 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin CC: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Mark Crispin wrote: > Hi Alexey - > > I think that you misunderstood my proposal. > > It's not 1 or 2a or 2b. It is 1 and (2a or 2b). > > In other words, there would always be the CAPABILITY response code in the > greeeting. > > In addition, capabilities would also be sent with AUTHENTICATE, LOGIN, and > STARTTLS (since they can change as a result of these commands); the only > question is whether we use the untagged CAPABILITY response, or the new > CAPABILITY response code for this case. > > I'm glad that you like the idea. I hope that with this clarification you like > it even better! Ok, in this case I would prefer having untagged CAPABILITY response both times. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05697 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:31:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (den@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05693 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:31:13 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:32:49 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY To: Alexey Melnikov cc: Mark Crispin , IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: <39E7712B.5349C4D8@messagingdirect.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Hi Alexey - I think that you misunderstood my proposal. It's not 1 or 2a or 2b. It is 1 and (2a or 2b). In other words, there would always be the CAPABILITY response code in the greeeting. In addition, capabilities would also be sent with AUTHENTICATE, LOGIN, and STARTTLS (since they can change as a result of these commands); the only question is whether we use the untagged CAPABILITY response, or the new CAPABILITY response code for this case. I'm glad that you like the idea. I hope that with this clarification you like it even better! -- Mark -- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05635 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:27:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05630 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:27:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (gagarin.esys.ca [198.161.92.84]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9DKVdC24740; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:31:39 -0600 Message-ID: <39E7712B.5349C4D8@messagingdirect.com> Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 14:31:39 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin CC: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Subject: Re: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Mark Crispin wrote: > I am thinking about reducing the number of RTTs in a typical IMAP session. > Can anyone come up with a good reason why these should NOT be added to IMAP. Hopefully not :-). > Everything is optional, and requires both client and server cluefullness. > > 1) New CAPABILITY response-code, to be used in the initial OK or PREAUTH > greeting. A client that sees this response-code can use the data in it > instead of issuing a separate CAPABILITY command. > > 2a) Option 1: server sends an untagged CAPABILITY response when doing a LOGIN, > AUTHENTICATE, or STARTTLS. > 2b) Option 2: server uses CAPABILITY response code. 1 or 2b works for me. 2b on connection is even better (unless there are some broken clients that die on this response :-)). I don't like 2a, because you need this data in order to do AUTHENTICATE/STARTTLS/LOGIN. > The disadvantage is extra data sent to clients that don't know about the new > mechanism. > > I believe that the disadvantage is minor compared to the potential advantage. Yep. Alexey Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA05071 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:00:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (tober@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA05067 for ; Fri, 13 Oct 2000 13:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 12:50:10 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: reducing RTTs on CAPABILITY To: IMAP Interest List , IMAP Extensions WG Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: I am thinking about reducing the number of RTTs in a typical IMAP session. Can anyone come up with a good reason why these should NOT be added to IMAP. Everything is optional, and requires both client and server cluefullness. 1) New CAPABILITY response-code, to be used in the initial OK or PREAUTH greeting. A client that sees this response-code can use the data in it instead of issuing a separate CAPABILITY command. 2a) Option 1: server sends an untagged CAPABILITY response when doing a LOGIN, AUTHENTICATE, or STARTTLS. 2b) Option 2: server uses CAPABILITY response code. There is a theoretical ambiguity in option 1 of confusion between a "here are the new capabilities after doing the command" and "here is an unsolicited set of capabilities changing the previous state." I don't think that this is a real problem (we can certainly legislate the interpretation); but we can use option 2 if people insist. The advantage is the elimination of two, possible three, RTTs per session if the client knows about the mechanism. In a "check for new mail" only session, this can be as much as a 42% reduction. The disadvantage is extra data sent to clients that don't know about the new mechanism. I believe that the disadvantage is minor compared to the potential advantage. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA24409 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:43:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA24405 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:43:31 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (2-022-edm.dial.worldgate.ca [207.167.2.22]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9D3lVC16624; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:47:31 -0600 Message-ID: <39E685D1.15CEB9A0@messagingdirect.com> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:47:30 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Lawrence Greenfield CC: Mark Crispin , Barry Leiba , ietf-imapext@imc.org Subject: Re: comments on LIST extensions References: <200010122302.e9CN2RG01290@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > > * REMOTE option > > The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on > > the LIST response. > > This may be a justification for additional data. Was this what you were > thinking of? I don't think that the actual location should be > returned as the matching mailbox name; we need the name that > matched. > > This is exactly what I was thinking of. Example: > > * LIST () "/" "Bread" (REMOTE "http://imap3.example.com/Bread") > > Clearly the extension data can be designed along the lines of the > FETCH response. Also we need an item to describe replicas of the mailbox (REPLICA URL1 URL2 ...) And I agree that REFERRAL is better than REMOTE. Alexey Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id UAA24035 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:21:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id UAA24030 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 20:21:26 -0700 (PDT) Received: from messagingdirect.com (2-022-edm.dial.worldgate.ca [207.167.2.22]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e9D3PvC16532; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:25:58 -0600 Message-ID: <39E680C2.AFC2DC62@messagingdirect.com> Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 21:25:54 -0600 From: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.74 [en] (Windows NT 5.0; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Crispin CC: Lawrence Greenfield , ietf-imapext@imc.org, Barry Leiba Subject: ACL info in extended LIST (Was Re: comments on LIST extensions) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Mark Crispin wrote: > On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > > * Additional data > > The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags > > to be returned. > > What type of additional data are you considering that can not be represented > by LIST attributes? I'm not opposed to making the LIST response extensible, > but before this is done there should be a compelling reason to do it beyond > "it would be nice". > > My ACLPLUS plan, for example, codes ACL information in LIST attributes. Mark, you proposed the following: > Here's how the RFC 2086 response examples would look in ACLPLUS > * ACL INBOX Fred rwipslda => * LIST (\NoInferiors \ACL:Fred=rwipslda) "" INBOX > > * LISTRIGHTS ~/Mail/saved smith la r swicd => * LIST (\NoInferiors \RIGHTS:smith=la_r_swicd) "" INBOX > > * MYRIGHTS INBOX => * LIST (\NoInferiors \MYRIGHTS=rwipslda) "" INBOX I like the idea of LIST response including ACLs and related stuff (but I agree with Larry that is should be returned only if it was asked for), however syntax as proposed doesn't work. First of all, you assume that identifier can't contain neither spaces, neither equal sign. The solution will be to use lists, something like the following: * LIST (\NoInferiors) "" INBOX (ACL ("Fred Dowson" rwipslda "Alexey Melnikov" rws)) Alexey Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA20902 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:04:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (carl@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA20895 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 17:04:05 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 16:06:28 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: comments on LIST extensions To: Lawrence Greenfield cc: Barry Leiba , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-Reply-To: <200010122302.e9CN2RG01290@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Thu, 12 Oct 2000 19:02:27 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > Overloading LIST attributes is inelegant, and forces the server to > always return data that the client didn't ask for. I disagree on both points. We have the LIST response attribute mechanism available to convey additional data; furthermore, it has extensibility (review RFC 2060). There is no need to change the LIST response in any way. Nobody says that the server should be "forced to always return data"; nor do LIST attributes have such a requirement. New attributes should be returned only if the client requests them (and the server indicates that they are available), or if the server is willing to offer them for free. > Encoding it as > extension data that can be requested by the client is the right way to > go. The same is true of LIST attributes that can be requested by the client. However, it doesn't require syntax changes to the LIST response. Instead, it uses an extension mechanism which is already there. > * LIST () "/" "Bread" (REMOTE "http://imap3.example.com/Bread") If this is really desirable, it should be separate from REMOTE, e.g. REFERRAL; or perhaps this functionality should be done by STATUS. I am not convinced that it's a good idea to change the syntax of the LIST response just to make it possible to expand referrals via wildcards. This may not be an inexpensive operation. It should not be mandatory to implement. Resist the temptation to add mandatory functionality to an existing mechanism. RLIST is an existing mechanism, and needs a direct replacement in extended LIST. > I don't understand what you mean by "actual name". Those was your nomenclature. In the example, it was "Bread". The local name, as opposed to the referral. > Read in the bookmark list. For each mailbox, iterate over it, > fetching the relevant information from the mailstore at the time. Here's what you've missed: What do you do when the bookmark refers to a name that doesn't exist? What do you do when the bookmark contains a remote name, requiring a connection to another server? In other words, the LSUB name itself is a referral. > For instance, one Unix client I perused once issues a LIST > for every returned mailbox from LSUB, since it couldn't depend on the > information from LSUB being usable. Yes, bad clients exist. They pay the performance penalty for being a bad client. Fortunately, most clients aren't bad clients. But that doesn't mean that we have to force servers to implement the bad thing, for no other reason than the specification provides no way out for the server. > we need a way for the server to say > "there are mailboxes of interest underneath this mailbox, but you > requested them not to be returned". We also need a way for a server to refuse to offer this information. This is what the whole issue is about. It isn't about whether or not a functionality should exist. It's about whether or not a server is permitted to implement one functionality without having to implement a different functionality that is too costly. We MUST allow a server to decide what to offer in extended LIST. Either have a separate LSUBEXT, or have a separate capability to indicate whether or not SUBSCRIBE is available to extended LIST. It is bad protocol design to hold the implementation of one functionality hostage to the implementation of another. People who advocate this often express fear that the latter functionality won't get implemented -- which is precisely what should happen. Additional functionality should stand on its own; if it can't then it deserves to die. This isn't the first time that I've sounded alarm bells over a tendency in this group to hold one functionality hostage to another. I'm afraid that it won't be the last time. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA19201 for ietf-imapext-bks; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 15:57:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (SMTP5.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.85]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA19197 for ; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 15:57:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from penguin.andrew.cmu.edu (PENGUIN.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.122.2]) (authenticated as leg with KERBEROS_V4 (56 bits)) by smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e9CN2RG01290; Thu, 12 Oct 2000 19:02:27 -0400 Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2000 19:02:27 -0400 Message-Id: <200010122302.e9CN2RG01290@smtp5.andrew.cmu.edu> From: Lawrence Greenfield X-Mailer: BatIMail version 3.2 To: Mark Crispin Cc: Barry Leiba , ietf-imapext@imc.org In-reply-to: Subject: Re: comments on LIST extensions References: Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 11:51:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org, Barry Leiba On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > * Additional data > The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags > to be returned. What type of additional data are you considering that can not be represented by LIST attributes? I'm not opposed to making the LIST response extensible, but before this is done there should be a compelling reason to do it beyond "it would be nice". My ACLPLUS plan, for example, codes ACL information in LIST attributes. Overloading LIST attributes is inelegant, and forces the server to always return data that the client didn't ask for. Encoding it as extension data that can be requested by the client is the right way to go. > * REMOTE option > The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on > the LIST response. This may be a justification for additional data. Was this what you were thinking of? I don't think that the actual location should be returned as the matching mailbox name; we need the name that matched. This is exactly what I was thinking of. Example: * LIST () "/" "Bread" (REMOTE "http://imap3.example.com/Bread") Clearly the extension data can be designed along the lines of the FETCH response. Possibly every list-extension return data should also be accessible via STATUS and vice-versa. The "actual name" should be the referral. Also, how does CHILD interact with this? I can think of arguments for it to apply to the matching name or to the actual name. It is major bad news if it applies to the actual name, but that suggests a particular implementation of referrals. I don't understand what you mean by "actual name". \HasChildren should be returned when there are children in _this_ namespace. \HasNoChildren should be returned when there are no children in _this_ namespace. Both of this are local decisions that the server responding to the LIST command can make. This should be stated in the LISTEXT spec or an updated referral spec. > * SUBSCRIBE option > I'm all in favor of the SUBSCRIBE option as outlined in the draft. > Cyrus implements subscriptions as a seperate list (not an attribute on > the mailbox) and I don't see any barrier to implementing this. This is not a sufficient reason for breaking the reference implementation. The SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE/LSUB mechanism was defined to support the mailbox bookmarking functionality of UW imapd. I don't understand how this "breaks" the UW implementation. Read in the bookmark list. For each mailbox, iterate over it, fetching the relevant information from the mailstore at the time. The exact same information can be returned from the LIST (SUBSCRIBED) as from LSUB---in fact, I find the difference between what LSUB returns and what LIST returns to be extremely confusing for client implementors. If clients want information like CHILDREN, they will get it from the server. For instance, one Unix client I perused once issues a LIST for every returned mailbox from LSUB, since it couldn't depend on the information from LSUB being usable. > However, I don't see an explicit definition of what happens if I'm > subscribed to "Vegetable/Broccoli" and I issue > a LIST (SUBSCRIBE) "" "%" > what hint do you get that "there's something under vegetable you're > interesting in"? Current servers return a \Noselect with LSUB, which > is not what we want---in fact, it's not even explicit in the base > spec, I believe. This is an excellent example of why subscriptions are a special case and should be handled separately. No, not at all. Another possible extension would be a LIST (UNSEEN) "" "%" * LIST () "/" "Fruit" * LIST (\Placeholder) "/" "Vegetable" a OK done where the "UNSEEN" extension lists mailboxes with unseen messages. Again, for the LIST extension, we need a way for the server to say "there are mailboxes of interest underneath this mailbox, but you requested them not to be returned". "UNSEEN" is not a wonderful example. Perhaps "MARKED", to return only mailboxes that are \Marked, would be more reasonable. > We need to make sure that additional options later won't have to > specify how they interact with every existing option. SUBSCRIBE is the one that stands out. ACL type options are something that I want to do sooner rather than later, and they will all fit in smoothly... except with SUBSCRIBE. Not at all. SUBSCRIBE is the only option that currently filters on a property of mailboxes---but future options might also do this. Larry Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA05071 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 03:26:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA05067 for ; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 03:26:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA05605; Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:31:14 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200010111031.GAA05605@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2000 06:31:13 -0400 Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Internet Message Access Protocol Extension Working Group of the IETF. Title : INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - THREAD EXTENSION Author(s) : M. Crispin, K. Murchison Filename : draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt Pages : 13 Date : 10-Oct-00 This document describes the server-based threading extension to the IMAP4rev1 protocol. This extension provides substantial performance improvements for IMAP clients which offer threaded views. A server which supports this extension indicates this with more or more capability names consisting of 'THREAD-' followed by a supported threading algorithm name as described in this document. This provides for future upwards-compatible extensions. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001010123240.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-imapext-thread-04.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001010123240.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart-- Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA00169 for ietf-imapext-bks; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:25:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from unity-mail.icomverse.com ([199.203.140.35]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA00153 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 09:25:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: by unity-mail.icomverse.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <4KGYV264>; Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:29:17 +0200 Message-ID: <479518ED4F21D411B46D0030480035BC1C4994@unity-mail.icomverse.com> From: "Erev, Ari" To: "'IMAP@cac.washington.edu'" , "'ietf-imapext@IMC.ORG'" Subject: IMAP Streaming Support Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2000 18:29:13 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Hello, On Fri, 20 Feb 1998, Stefano Santoro from VoiceTek posted the following to the IMAP mailing list. > I was wandering if someone has thought about adding an IMAP capability > expressively designed to support streaming media formats (i.e.: voice > and/or video mail). Any capability that would enable an e-mail > client play a voice message while the message is being "FETCH"ed > using streaming protocol handshakes, and delivery discipline. > > Any help in this matter would be greatly appreciated, > > Thanks, > Stefano Santoro > Voicetek Corporation, Inc. This post was followed by a number of responses from various people. There was also a post (by Jonathan Taylor from Mediagate) that indicates that this issue was to be discussed in an IMAP workgroup meeting in late 1998. I was wondering whether "Streaming Support" founds its way to IMAP in any form (draft, proposed standard). If yes - can you please point me in the right direction? If it has NOT been standardized - is there some common practice used by imap clients/servers for the streaming functionality? Thanks, Ari Erev Comverse Network Systems Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id RAA12397 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 17:38:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail3.mia.bellsouth.net (mail3.mia.bellsouth.net [205.152.144.15]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA12392 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 17:38:36 -0700 (PDT) From: bubblehead32@hotmail.com Received: from www.goldendeckcasino.com (adsl-61-143-206.mia.bellsouth.net [208.61.143.206]) by mail3.mia.bellsouth.net (3.3.5alt/0.75.2) with SMTP id UAA18578; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 20:42:08 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200010090042.UAA18578@mail3.mia.bellsouth.net> To: <> Subject: WOW!!! Highest Payouts Around!!!!!!!! Date: Sun, 08 Oct 2000 20:26:03 -0400 X-Sender: bubblehead32@hotmail.com X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Its just like being there. Go to www.goldendeckcasino.com/goldendeckcasino/links/2769.html. If you would like to be removed from these mailings in the future please mailto:bubblehead32@hotmail.com?subject=remove Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA11129 for ietf-imapext-bks; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:00:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from www.tclking.com (IDENT:root@szptt103-190.szptt.net.cn [202.103.190.164] (may be forged)) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id QAA11125 for ; Sun, 8 Oct 2000 16:00:19 -0700 (PDT) From: rsb@docsj.de Received: from pavilion (mig-fl29a-49.rasserver.net [206.214.131.49]) by www.tclking.com (8.9.3/8.8.7) with SMTP id HAA26400; Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:18:16 +0800 Date: Mon, 9 Oct 2000 07:18:16 +0800 Message-Id: <200010082318.HAA26400@www.tclking.com> To: rsb@docsj.de Subject: At last, HERBAL V the all natural alternative! Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Herbal V: An Incredible All-Natural Healthy Alternative Herbal V is the All Natural Approach to Male Virility, Vitality and Pleasure. Available N o w ! Welcome to the New Sexual Revolution. It's the all natural male potency and pleasure pill that men everywhere are buzzing about. Herbal V is safe, natural and specifically formulated to help support male sexual function and pleasure. You just take two easy-to-swallow tablets one hour before sex. And there's more great news - you can get Herbal V for less than $1 a pill. Amazing word of mouth praise on Herbal V has been spreading like wildfire-already over 1,500,000 men have chosen Herbal V. Since it is 100% natural you will never have to worry about safety. Try doctor-recommended Herbal V today and have the greatest night of your life! Herbal V... Bringing Back the Magic! 1,585,000 men can't be wrong. To date over 1 million men have tried the super supplement Herbal V. Here is why: No Doctor Visit Required Available Over the Counter Not a Drug 100% Natural Safe, No Worries Highest Quality Pharmaceutical-Grade Pure Nutriceuticals Guaranteed Potency & Purity Be a Real Man Again! Questions and Answers What is Herbal V? Herbal V is a proprietary blend that was specifically developed as a safe alternative for men who prefer an all-natural approach to address impotence and boost sexual performance. This amazing formula first became popular with Hollywood insiders and the wealthy elite. They were maximizing their sex lives, long before it was available to the general public. How does Herbal V work? Developed by a team whose goal was to create the perfect all-natural aphrodisiac. Herbal V is the result of that remarkable effort. The Herbal V formula contains a precise blend of cutting edge pro-sexual nutrients from around the world that provide nutritional support, making it possible for a man to have a pleasurable sexual experience. What can Herbal V do for me? Herbal V helps support male sexual function and pleasure in a safe and natural manner. Simply put, it can make your sex life incredible. Is Herbal V Safe? One of the great things about Herbal V is that it is not a drug. It is an incredible herbal dietary supplement that provides nutritional support for male sexual function and pleasure. One of the most comforting features of Herbal V is that you never have to worry about safety. Herbal V: Safe - Natural - Exciting Many have speculated that because Herbal V is so popular with men, it must contain prescription drugs or chemical components. Herbal V does not contain any elements or traces of any prescription drug. Herbal V is made using the world's most technologically advanced state-of-the-art cold processing equipment to ensure maximum purity. Herbal V has been independently analyzed by the nation's premier testing facility to ensure purity, quality and to end the rumors that, because it is so popular, it must somehow be chemical. It is not. Herbal V is natural - just as it says on the label. Herbal V is simply fantastic! Herbal V: Ingredients Yohimbe, saw palmetto, avena sativa, androstenedione, guarana, taurine, siberian ginseng, tribulus terrestris. Tribulus Terrestis is certified to enhanced testosterone levels by increasing Luteinzing hormone (LH) levels. Androstenedione which is a precursor to testosterone unlocks bound testosterone and makes it biologically active again quickly. This means a dramatic surge in desire. Avena Sativa Stimulates the neurotransmitter pleasure centers to maximum capacity. This greatly intensifies pleasure. Just listen to what Herbal V has done for the sex lives of people like you! “On a scale of 1 to 10, it's a 15. Electrifying. It's like a wonder pill!” — Justin Q B., New Haven, Texas “I haven't had sexual relations in 11 years. Then with Herbal V it was... wow! It works again!” — Sid R., Lakeland, Florida “I had sex four times in one night. It made me feel like a 19-year-old again.” — Chip S, Beech Mountain, North Carolina “Herbal V has turned my husband into a Sexual Superman! I like the fact that it's all natural and has no side effects. It's bringing back the good old days.” — Jennifer B, Beverly Hills, California The above testimonials are from product literature, and we have not independently verified them. However, the following testimonial is from a "senior" gentleman who has purchased his second bottle of Herbal V. When we heard his words with our own ears, we asked his permission to print them here. “Man! I'm wild as I can be! I feel like I'm 25 years old again! I'm not believing this!” — Mr. Murphy, age 64, Lampart, IL. Risk Free: Double Your Money Back Guarantee If Herbal V does not give the desired results as stated above, simply return the unused portion for a double-your money back refund. No questions asked ! Order Now: Safe, Fast, Secure, Private Herbal V with its DOUBLE YOUR MONEY BACK GUARANTEE is available only through this special promotional offer. Herbal V arrives in plain packaging for your privacy. Any and all information is kept strictly confidential. Payment Methods You may FAX or Postal Mail Checks, MasterCard, Visa, & American Express.payments. Money Orders are accepted only by Postal Mail. Each bottle of Herbal V contains 30 tablets, approximately a 1 month supply. Step 1: Place a check by your desired quanity. ______ 1 Bottle of Herbal V $24 ______ 2 Bottles of Herbal V $44 ______ 3 Bottles of Herbal V $59 Please add $6 shipping and handling for any size order. [ Total cost including shipping & handling, 1 bottle=$30, 2 bottles=$50, 3 bottles=$65 ] International Orders Please add $16 shipping and handling for any size order. [ Total cost including shipping & handling, 1 bottle=$40, 2 bottles=$60, 3 bottles=$75 ] Step 2: Place a check by your desired payment method and complete fields if necessary. _____Check or CHECK-BY-FAX [details below] _____Money Order _____American Express Account Number__________________ Exp____/____ _____Visa Account Number__________________ Exp____/____ _____MasterCard Account Number__________________ Exp____/____ Please make your check or money order payable to "Lion Sciences National". Step 3: Please complete and print the following fields clearly. Name ___________________________________________________ Address _________________________________________________ City ____________________________________________________ State ___________________________________________________ Zip _____________________________________________________ E-mail __________________________________________________ Signature _________________________________________________ [ required for check and credit card orders] Toll Free FAX Order Line: 1-800-940-6590 If faxing in your order, please state whether you require a fax, email, or no confirmation at all. Allow up to one day for confirmation, if requested. FAX orders are processed immediately. Or, print & mail to: LSN 3502 N. Powerline Rd. #525 Pompano Beach, FL 33069 ______________________________________________________ *CHECK BY FAX ORDERS: Complete the check as normal. Tape the check in the area below. Below the check, clearly write the check number, all numbers at the bottom of the check, & your name. Tape the check below and fax the check to the toll free FAX number above. Void the check. Our merchant will electronically debit your account for the amount of the check; your reference number for this transaction will be your check number. Nothing could be safer & easier ! TAPE CHECK BELOW _____________________________________________________________ This is a one time mailing: Removal is automatic and no further contact is necessary. Please Note: Herbal V is not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. As individuals differ, so will results. Herbal V helps provide herbal and nutritional support for male sexual performance. The FDA has not evaluated these statements. For details about our double your money back guarantee, please write to the above address, attention consumer affairs department; enclose a self addressed stamped envelope for this and any requested contact information. Thank You. Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id MAA14469 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:16:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (bill@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id MAA14464 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 12:15:54 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 11:51:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: comments on LIST extensions To: Lawrence Greenfield cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org, Barry Leiba In-Reply-To: <200010061731.e96HVPH02499@smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400, Lawrence Greenfield wrote: > * Additional data > The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags > to be returned. What type of additional data are you considering that can not be represented by LIST attributes? I'm not opposed to making the LIST response extensible, but before this is done there should be a compelling reason to do it beyond "it would be nice". My ACLPLUS plan, for example, codes ACL information in LIST attributes. > * REMOTE option > The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on > the LIST response. This may be a justification for additional data. Was this what you were thinking of? I don't think that the actual location should be returned as the matching mailbox name; we need the name that matched. The "actual name" should be the referral. Also, how does CHILD interact with this? I can think of arguments for it to apply to the matching name or to the actual name. It is major bad news if it applies to the actual name, but that suggests a particular implementation of referrals. > * SUBSCRIBE option > I'm all in favor of the SUBSCRIBE option as outlined in the draft. > Cyrus implements subscriptions as a seperate list (not an attribute on > the mailbox) and I don't see any barrier to implementing this. This is not a sufficient reason for breaking the reference implementation. The SUBSCRIBE/UNSUBSCRIBE/LSUB mechanism was defined to support the mailbox bookmarking functionality of UW imapd. > However, I don't see an explicit definition of what happens if I'm > subscribed to "Vegetable/Broccoli" and I issue > a LIST (SUBSCRIBE) "" "%" > what hint do you get that "there's something under vegetable you're > interesting in"? Current servers return a \Noselect with LSUB, which > is not what we want---in fact, it's not even explicit in the base > spec, I believe. This is an excellent example of why subscriptions are a special case and should be handled separately. > * Children option > Finally, I don't understand what purpose making the CHILDREN > information optional if the client asks for it. If you insist upon shoehorning SUBSCRIBE into the extended LIST, you have no choice. It's going to happen. You won't get remotes either. The problem is that you are attempting to make an incompatible change to IMAP. You can't do that. All these problems will go away if you take SUBSCRIBE out of LIST, and create an LSUBEXT if you really want that capability. > For instance: what's the relation between CHILDREN and SUBSCRIBE? > Does \HasChildren indicate that there are subscribed mailboxes below > this one, or does it indicate that there are any mailboxes below this? Once again, take SUBSCRIBE out, and do LSUBEXT if that's what you really want. You're making lots of unnecessary trouble for yourselves (and to me!) by keeping SUBSCRIBE. I doubt that the modest gain (8 octets in CAPABILITY) is worth it. > We need to make sure that additional options later won't have to > specify how they interact with every existing option. SUBSCRIBE is the one that stands out. ACL type options are something that I want to do sooner rather than later, and they will all fit in smoothly... except with SUBSCRIBE. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id KAA12811 for ietf-imapext-bks; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:40:41 -0700 (PDT) Received: from smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu (SMTP4.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.10.84]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA12807 for ; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 10:40:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from penguin.andrew.cmu.edu (PENGUIN.ANDREW.CMU.EDU [128.2.122.2]) (authenticated as leg with KERBEROS_V4 (56 bits)) by smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu (8.11.1/8.11.0) with ESMTP id e96HVPH02499; Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:26 -0400 Date: Fri, 6 Oct 2000 13:31:25 -0400 Message-Id: <200010061731.e96HVPH02499@smtp4.andrew.cmu.edu> From: Lawrence Greenfield X-Mailer: BatIMail version 3.2 To: ietf-imapext@imc.org Cc: Barry Leiba Subject: comments on LIST extensions Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: Here are some issues that I already bounced off of Barry, and he seems to agree with most of what I say below (or he'll jump on me, either way). This message will touch on much of the draft. * Additional data The LIST extension should allow for additional data besides just flags to be returned. This would allow additional data returned for clients that request it, instead of forcing a potentially length back'n'forth for data that the client will eventually get anyway. * REMOTE option The REMOTE option should return the actual location of the mailbox on the LIST response. I need this so that my aggregator can transparently proxy for clients that don't understand referrals. It also saves the client a roundtrip of trying to SELECT a mailbox that doesn't exist on this server---we might as well tell the client where the mailbox is off the bat. * SUBSCRIBE option I'm all in favor of the SUBSCRIBE option as outlined in the draft. Cyrus implements subscriptions as a seperate list (not an attribute on the mailbox) and I don't see any barrier to implementing this. However, I don't see an explicit definition of what happens if I'm subscribed to "Vegetable/Broccoli" and I issue a LIST (SUBSCRIBE) "" "%" what hint do you get that "there's something under vegetable you're interesting in"? Current servers return a \Noselect with LSUB, which is not what we want---in fact, it's not even explicit in the base spec, I believe. We should find a flag (\Placeholder?) to indicate this. * Children option Finally, I don't understand what purpose making the CHILDREN information optional if the client asks for it. If the server doesn't return it, the client will eventually make the server do the work anyway, by sending additional commands. Solution: if the client specifies CHILDREN, the server MUST send \HasChildren or \HasNoChildren with each returned mailbox. * Option interactions I think making sure that options are parametric to each other is a very important feature. (This is something that Sieve, for example, does very badly.) For instance: what's the relation between CHILDREN and SUBSCRIBE? Does \HasChildren indicate that there are subscribed mailboxes below this one, or does it indicate that there are any mailboxes below this? (Neither Barry nor I know any easy way out of this.) We need to make sure that additional options later won't have to specify how they interact with every existing option. -- Thanks, Larry Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id PAA02569 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:01:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout2.cac.washington.edu (mxout2.cac.washington.edu [140.142.33.4]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id PAA02565 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:01:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout2.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id PAA26075; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:05:26 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (johnbill@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id PAA14118; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:05:26 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:48:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: re: List attributes - was Re: LIST extensions I-D To: Steve Hole cc: IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:37:37 -0600, Steve Hole wrote: > If we do a different list command, from the ground up, I will strenously > argue for an alternative model. As always, one will be free to > implement said extension or not. A different LIST command from the ground up with an alternative model is fine. In which case, we also need a set of commands to define, remove, and itemize mailbox bookmarks. Hmm. Perhaps we can call one command SUBSCRIBE, another command UNSUBSCRIBE, and the third LSUB. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA01779 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:34:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA01775 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:34:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kepler (kepler.esys.ca [198.161.92.108]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e94LcPt20290; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:38:25 -0600 From: Steve Hole Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:37:37 -0600 To: Mark Crispin Subject: List attributes - was Re: LIST extensions I-D Cc: IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Mailer: Execmail for Win32 5.1.1 Build (10) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Mark Crispin wrote: > On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:10 -0600, Steve Hole wrote: > > I disagree. I think that subscription is an > > attribute of a folder. > > If subscription is an attribute of a mailbox then how do you handle > subscriptions of mailboxes that don't exist (which *is* required by the > specification)? Which you put in the specification, I vehemently disagreed with, but for the sake of getting it out the door, capitulated on. In retrospect it sucks. I never liked it, and I like even less now. But ... it doesn't matter. This is all water under the bridge and you and I have disagreed on this particular matter many times before. It is the way it is and it cannot change. This draft does talk about extending LIST and because of that I'll agree that it conflicts with the existing LIST semantic. However. If we do a different list command, from the ground up, I will strenously argue for an alternative model. As always, one will be free to implement said extension or not. > Yes, there are quite a few other types of attributes. But they all apply to > mailboxes which exist. Which is fine. Users with access to shared mailbox collections want to group or subset folders by some other meaningful classification system. "Subscription" as a concept is one such classification system. It has the merit of being easily understood because of the precedent in News. As a client writer wishing to support such a feature I want to search for a set of folders that match criteria that examines data attributes on the folders and returns matching results. I want to issue one command to do the search and get the desired information. Cheers. --- Steve Hole Messaging Direct Mailto:Steve.Hole@MessagingDirect.com Phone: 780-424-4922 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id OAA00946 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:02:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout1.cac.washington.edu (mxout1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.5]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id OAA00942 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:02:13 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout1.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id OAA01722; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:06:09 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (strider@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id OAA03004; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:06:09 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 14:04:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: LIST extensions I-D To: Steve Hole cc: leiba@watson.ibm.com, IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:10 -0600, Steve Hole wrote: > I disagree. I think that subscription is an > attribute of a folder. If subscription is an attribute of a mailbox then how do you handle subscriptions of mailboxes that don't exist (which *is* required by the specification)? > In fact, I would suggest that there may be > several other types of attributes associated with a folder and would like > them all treated as such. Yes, there are quite a few other types of attributes. But they all apply to mailboxes which exist. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id NAA00834 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 13:59:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rembrandt.esys.ca (IDENT:root@rembrandt.esys.ca [198.161.92.131]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id NAA00830 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 13:59:16 -0700 (PDT) Received: from kepler (kepler.esys.ca [198.161.92.108]) (authenticated) by rembrandt.esys.ca (8.11.0.Beta0/8.11.0.Beta0) with ESMTP id e94L2wt19965; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:58 -0600 From: Steve Hole Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 15:02:10 -0600 To: Mark Crispin Subject: Re: LIST extensions I-D Cc: leiba@watson.ibm.com, IMAP Extensions WG In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: X-Mailer: Execmail for Win32 5.1.1 Build (10) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii" Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: On Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:20:33 -0700 (PDT) Mark Crispin wrote: > I would also like to issue a loud "MUMBLE!" about the SUBSCRIPTIONS list > option. IMHO, this is not a good idea, since it has an implied assumption > subscriptions is a state of a mailbox rather than a newsrc-type list. > > Unlike the other LIST options, subscriptions are a completely different > namespace, and can refer to names that don't exist. The other LIST options > simply add data to the LIST results; they don't do a complete change of > namespace. I feel that SUBSCRIPTIONS muddy the waters. I disagree. I think that subscription is an attribute of a folder. In fact, I would suggest that there may be several other types of attributes associated with a folder and would like them all treated as such. > I am also concerned about the interaction between SUBSCRIPTIONS and the other > list options. IMHO, this isn't particularly useful (unless you have a > completely wrongheaded idea of how to use subscriptions...). When subscribed > proxy names are put into this picture, CHILDREN and REMOTE can really become > costly. Completely, totally dependent on your implementation. In fact, for us it is quite quick to do this. We have disagreed on this issue before however :-). > I suggest a separate LSUBEXT extension if this is really desired (I suspect > that LSUBEXT won't be widely implemented) that would add list options to LSUB. > At least, there should be an extension to control SUBSCRIPTIONS in LISTEXT. > > It doesn't add any real cost to have LSUBEXT (OK, 8 additional octets in the > CAPABILITIES), but it can make an enormous difference to some servers. In fact, we had talked about a complete new list command extension that incorporates all of these concepts together, along with folder annotations and some other things. This was discussed in IMAPext -- who ended up with this? What is the status? Cheers. --- Steve Hole Messaging Direct Mailto:Steve.Hole@MessagingDirect.com Phone: 780-424-4922 Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id IAA23634 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:44:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mxout1.cac.washington.edu (mxout1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.32.5]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id IAA23630 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:44:43 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailhost1.u.washington.edu (mailhost1.u.washington.edu [140.142.32.2]) by mxout1.cac.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW99.09) with ESMTP id IAA08542; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:48:40 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (ctw@tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) by mailhost1.u.washington.edu (8.9.3+UW00.02/8.9.3+UW00.01) with ESMTP id IAA11668; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:48:40 -0700 Date: Wed, 4 Oct 2000 08:20:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin Subject: LIST extensions I-D To: leiba@watson.ibm.com cc: IMAP Extensions WG Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: I agree with the basic concept, and in fact intend to implement this sooner rather than later because it ties in with other work that I want to do. However, I would like to request a change in syntax, to: list = "LIST" SP mailbox SP list-mailbox [SP list-options] It's a minor tweak; a slightly simpler command parse and IMHO architecturally cleaner. It doesn't make the command line any larger. The parentheses around the list-options should be retained, even though they are "not necessary" with my tweak. This is to allow the addition of a fourth argument to the LIST command in the future. I would also like to issue a loud "MUMBLE!" about the SUBSCRIPTIONS list option. IMHO, this is not a good idea, since it has an implied assumption subscriptions is a state of a mailbox rather than a newsrc-type list. Unlike the other LIST options, subscriptions are a completely different namespace, and can refer to names that don't exist. The other LIST options simply add data to the LIST results; they don't do a complete change of namespace. I feel that SUBSCRIPTIONS muddy the waters. I am also concerned about the interaction between SUBSCRIPTIONS and the other list options. IMHO, this isn't particularly useful (unless you have a completely wrongheaded idea of how to use subscriptions...). When subscribed proxy names are put into this picture, CHILDREN and REMOTE can really become costly. I suggest a separate LSUBEXT extension if this is really desired (I suspect that LSUBEXT won't be widely implemented) that would add list options to LSUB. At least, there should be an extension to control SUBSCRIPTIONS in LISTEXT. It doesn't add any real cost to have LSUBEXT (OK, 8 additional octets in the CAPABILITIES), but it can make an enormous difference to some servers. Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id DAA05003 for ietf-imapext-bks; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:51:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ietf.org (odin.ietf.org [132.151.1.176]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id DAA04999 for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 03:51:09 -0700 (PDT) Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id GAA14870; Wed, 4 Oct 2000 06:55:06 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200010041055.GAA14870@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: IETF-Announce: ; Cc: ietf-imapext@imc.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Reply-to: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt Date: Wed, 04 Oct 2000 06:55:05 -0400 Sender: owner-ietf-imapext@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Internet Message Access Protocol Extension Working Group of the IETF. Title : IMAP4 LIST Command Extensions Author(s) : B. Leiba Filename : draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt Pages : 7 Date : 03-Oct-00 IMAP4 has two commands for listing mailboxes: LIST and LSUB. As we add extensions that require specialized lists (see [MboxRefer] for an example) we expand the number of list commands, as each extension must add its function to both LIST and LSUB. This document describes extensions to the LIST command that allow these additions to be done in mutually compatible options to the LIST command, avoiding the exponential increase in specialized list commands. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username "anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in, type "cd internet-drafts" and then "get draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt". A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail. Send a message to: mailserv@ietf.org. In the body type: "FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt". NOTE: The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility. To use this feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE" command. To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or a MIME-compliant mail reader. Different MIME-compliant mail readers exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with "multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on how to manipulate these messages. Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess" --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; access-type="mail-server"; server="mailserv@ietf.org" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001003122858.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-imapext-list-extensions-00.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <20001003122858.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart--