From nobody Fri Feb 5 02:59:03 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 514821A1B79 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 02:59:02 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NSYXmL2Av-Ko for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 02:59:00 -0800 (PST) Received: from statler.isode.com (Statler.isode.com [62.232.206.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C10271A1B76 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 02:59:00 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1454669940; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=yhrabD3T8phM8M4xn20cJa6W0aFq/N6tXvSfQSd8qj8=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=Tt3M/q2ey3j02EyAG7mGU/+JA3R1vA0qUYg4Wt+Y9EkxTQ+aI73j/4LUmYHA737Wi6pN/z MxmyxpbiCINAmdv8mXGTPFLTqIGemHl58AkJlODbl9t83bZ1+Mr2BkD6Su9vXeNBO2rJMS N7w8NPTvh921eK2o3Ln9JrroXIawouo=; Received: from [192.168.0.5] (cpc5-nmal20-2-0-cust24.19-2.cable.virginm.net [92.234.84.25]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:58:59 +0000 To: Jayantheesh S B , "imapext@ietf.org" References: <6.2.5.6.2.20151204031930.103a4fd0@elandnews.com> <5666FA20.3060308@isode.com> <56672B8D.5010609@teamaol.com> <32632fae99ba42028794d611b8e31b41@SEAMBX01.sea.samsung.com> From: Alexey Melnikov Message-ID: <56B4806F.6080603@isode.com> Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2016 10:58:55 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: <32632fae99ba42028794d611b8e31b41@SEAMBX01.sea.samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Cc: "S Moonesamy \(sm+ietf@elandsys.com\)" Subject: Re: [imapext] IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals - draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-01 X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 10:59:02 -0000 Hi Jay, On 28/01/2016 21:02, Jayantheesh S B wrote: > Hi Alexey, > > I agree with not to restrict this with only APPEND command. Ok, I will update the draft to apply the limit to all commands. > All, > > > > Kindly share your review comments for this > draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-01. > > > > Regards, > > Jay > > *From:*imapext [mailto:imapext-bounces@ietf.org] *On Behalf Of *Stu Brandt > *Sent:* Tuesday, December 08, 2015 2:12 PM > *To:* imapext@ietf.org > *Subject:* Re: [imapext] IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals - > draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-01 > > > > Alexey - > > I agree with Jamie...restricting to just APPEND (and MULTIAPPEND, and > CATENATE) seems unnecessary. Thinking of potential new extensions > (e.g. REPLACE), there could likely be additional cases where the > motivation for LITERAL- applies. > > - Stu > > On 12/8/15 10:41 AM, Alexey Melnikov wrote: > > On 04/12/2015 18:35, Jamie Nicolson wrote: > > Apologies if this was discussed before, but why limit the LITERAL- > size restriction to APPEND? Why not just make it apply to all > commands: any literal > 4KB must be sent as a synchronizing literal. > This might be easier for clients and servers to implement, so that > the code for processing literals doesn't need to know which command > it belongs to. The impact on other commands would be very limited, > since they will almost never need to send a literal that large. > > I personally don't mind if it applies to all commands. Other thoughts? > > > > On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 3:25 AM, S Moonesamy > wrote: > > Hello, > > The second draft on our charter about "IMAP4 non-synchronizing > literals" [1]. Could the working group please review > draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-01 and send comments to the mailing list? > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy (as imapapdb WG Chair) > > 1. https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-01 > > _______________________________________________ > imapext mailing list > imapext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > imapext mailing list > > imapext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > imapext mailing list > > imapext@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > imapext mailing list > imapext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext > From nobody Fri Feb 5 04:31:53 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietf.org Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6E0C1A6FC0; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 04:31:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: internet-drafts@ietf.org To: X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.13.0 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <20160205123151.31910.90476.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 04:31:51 -0800 Archived-At: Cc: imapext@ietf.org Subject: [imapext] I-D Action: draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02.txt X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 12:31:51 -0000 A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the IMAP APPEND Extensions Working Group of the IETF. Title : IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals Author : Alexey Melnikov Filename : draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02.txt Pages : 7 Date : 2016-02-05 Abstract: The Internet Message Access Protocol (RFC 3501) contains the "literal" syntactic construct for communicating strings. When sending a literal from client to server, IMAP requires the client to wait for the server to send a command continuation request between sending the octet count and the string data. This document specifies an alternate form of literal which does not require this network round trip. This document specifies 2 IMAP extensions: LITERAL+ and LITERAL-. The former allows the alternate form of literals in all IMAP command. The latter is the same as LITERAL+, but disallow the alternate form of literals unless they are 4096 bytes or less. The IETF datatracker status page for this draft is: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis/ There's also a htmlized version available at: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 A diff from the previous version is available at: https://www.ietf.org/rfcdiff?url2=draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 Please note that it may take a couple of minutes from the time of submission until the htmlized version and diff are available at tools.ietf.org. Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ From nobody Fri Feb 5 12:17:51 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 583231ACDC5 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:17:50 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.102 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.102 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id T6SptS6SbfUc for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 190391A0078 for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:17:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from SUBMAN.elandsys.com ([197.227.80.159]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id u15KHagT011613 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Fri, 5 Feb 2016 12:17:47 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=opendkim.org; s=mail2010; t=1454703468; x=1454789868; bh=M6iwXKeEX2ziw2G5HeHexIcSqxRlUIka1DsHQAaNb6A=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=IA8MdKyhEoRD7FFm6vTZlL9uDWKEF0rMjLv3XHLXTiesT+DOsorjfVD/CfwQTIWxi 07ipzYXXoTWxQtTJDbRsaRUMVe3PLe2eOM9Y+O/+e9fbXOjwDgMRtnazuDOHwZ+qLD xIUUbDnw6Sy2W2KxxQVYFFH8co0c/hlICSOBFO8M= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=elandsys.com; s=mail; t=1454703468; x=1454789868; i=@elandsys.com; bh=M6iwXKeEX2ziw2G5HeHexIcSqxRlUIka1DsHQAaNb6A=; h=Date:To:From:Subject; b=pi4xj20FYEv30oZUQydKwy+tzN5ekt01kWF++4dIZApy7JtkkYyRfgA8ljvrHFgfo K/p3VGivcNsY8x6nJ1oKOOaAQ0PxQeux9Tcjffxh4cYw4XLa2ls5f7q5XgnEq7LpV6 nM1gtFnAgAyKpU+WgCglGL7MEdq11FnvD/R7K/Gk= Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com> X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6 Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 12:17:20 -0800 To: imapext@ietf.org From: S Moonesamy Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2016 20:17:50 -0000 Hello, This message starts a Working Group Last Call for "IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals" (draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02). The I-D can be accessed at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 This Working Group Last Call will end on Saturday 20th February. Please review the I-D and send comments to the imapext@ietf.org mailing list. Regards, S. Moonesamy (as imapapdb WG Chair) From nobody Wed Feb 10 07:25:50 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E490B1B2BDD for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:25:48 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -0.5 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-0.5, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 09ldGiV3WY2v for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:25:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from wguard01.sdsamerica.net (mx1.sdsamerica.net [206.67.236.191]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A7A681B2BD4 for ; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 07:25:42 -0800 (PST) From: Jayantheesh S B To: S Moonesamy , "imapext@ietf.org" , "alexey.melnikov@isode.com" Thread-Topic: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 Thread-Index: AQHRYFJLefKm//RnxkaiYA8SdKsMh58lbKiw Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:25:40 +0000 Message-ID: <190adcbcae3d4ba1abc0308ec903ac04@SEAMBX01.sea.samsung.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Received-SPF: none Archived-At: Subject: Re: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 15:25:49 -0000 This version of document looks fine for me. =20 I see text "non-synchronizing" is not mentioned consistent across the docum= ent. Some places its mentioned as "non- synchronizing" and in some place I see "= non synchronizing". Also I see To Do section in the document with below text. "Exact semantics of LITERAL- is still in flux." This section can be removed once if the semantics has been defined.=20 -----Original Message----- From: imapext [mailto:imapext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of S Moonesamy Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 3:17 PM To: imapext@ietf.org Subject: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 Hello, This message starts a Working Group Last Call for "IMAP4 non-synchronizing = literals" (draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02). The I-D can be accessed at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 This Working Group Last Call will end on Saturday 20th February. Please re= view the I-D and send comments to the imapext@ietf.org mailing list. Regards, S. Moonesamy (as imapapdb WG Chair) _______________________________________________ imapext mailing list imapext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext From nobody Thu Feb 11 06:48:32 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 213691B32B5 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:48:31 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.002 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.002 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id OOsffDyRHGB3 for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:48:29 -0800 (PST) Received: from statler.isode.com (Statler.isode.com [62.232.206.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7FACC1B32AD for ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:48:29 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1455202108; d=isode.com; s=selector; i=@isode.com; bh=Vd0PaSIPfFEdhdIXImiWcLwIfRh6MCFMf8i6Yri+JZ4=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=LqMmofISw5eQY+lcaedDOqqI7Ok8Q3iaUH43sIiR86Ztq8BbxpzhjqkSXntISDv2ixSwfv bFPduwVdVeFSKXzhZfttP20FojlbLxviAK3YmSQYsRIT7C2rfNCv0cRF6A3ovlOJKjONYw HPOvyH3ngSDIhOIOgFT0W/GjgV739rs=; Received: from [172.20.1.215] (dhcp-215.isode.net [172.20.1.215]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id ; Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:48:28 +0000 To: Jayantheesh S B , S Moonesamy , "imapext@ietf.org" References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com> <190adcbcae3d4ba1abc0308ec903ac04@SEAMBX01.sea.samsung.com> From: Alexey Melnikov Message-ID: <56BC9F2C.7010701@isode.com> Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:48:12 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.0 In-Reply-To: <190adcbcae3d4ba1abc0308ec903ac04@SEAMBX01.sea.samsung.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Archived-At: Subject: Re: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2016 14:48:31 -0000 Thank you for your review! On 10/02/2016 15:25, Jayantheesh S B wrote: > This version of document looks fine for me. > > I see text "non-synchronizing" is not mentioned consistent across the document. > Some places its mentioned as "non- synchronizing" and in some place I see "non synchronizing". Yes, it would be a good idea to make this consistent in the document. > Also I see To Do section in the document with below text. > > "Exact semantics of LITERAL- is still in flux." > > This section can be removed once if the semantics has been defined. Oops. I think we are more or less decided on semantics, so I will remove the section. > -----Original Message----- > From: imapext [mailto:imapext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of S Moonesamy > Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 3:17 PM > To: imapext@ietf.org > Subject: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 > > Hello, > > This message starts a Working Group Last Call for "IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals" (draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02). The I-D can be accessed at > https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 > > This Working Group Last Call will end on Saturday 20th February. Please review the I-D and send comments to the imapext@ietf.org mailing list. > > Regards, > S. Moonesamy (as imapapdb WG Chair) > > _______________________________________________ > imapext mailing list > imapext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext > > _______________________________________________ > imapext mailing list > imapext@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext From nobody Thu Feb 25 08:32:19 2016 Return-Path: X-Original-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: imapext@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CA0B1B2CE6 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 08:32:18 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.9 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] autolearn=ham Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pAz2BhRjrtYO for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 08:32:16 -0800 (PST) Received: from wguard01.sdsamerica.net (mx1.sdsamerica.net [206.67.236.191]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D79361B2CE2 for ; Thu, 25 Feb 2016 08:32:16 -0800 (PST) From: Jayantheesh S B To: S Moonesamy , "imapext@ietf.org" Thread-Topic: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 Thread-Index: AQHRYFJLefKm//RnxkaiYA8SdKsMh589Ex+Q Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 16:32:12 +0000 Message-ID: <32efdefdc1d847ae9c7c74323b77f914@SEAMBX01.sea.samsung.com> References: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com> In-Reply-To: <6.2.5.6.2.20160205121329.102a7f38@elandnews.com> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 Received-SPF: none Archived-At: Subject: Re: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 X-BeenThere: imapext@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion of IMAP extensions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 25 Feb 2016 16:32:18 -0000 All, Kindly share your review comments for this draft (This Working Group Last C= all will end on Saturday 20th February) Regards, Jay -----Original Message----- From: imapext [mailto:imapext-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of S Moonesamy Sent: Friday, February 05, 2016 3:17 PM To: imapext@ietf.org Subject: [imapext] WGLC for draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 Hello, This message starts a Working Group Last Call for "IMAP4 non-synchronizing = literals" (draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02). The I-D can be accessed at https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-imapapnd-rfc2088bis-02 This Working Group Last Call will end on Saturday 20th February. Please re= view the I-D and send comments to the imapext@ietf.org mailing list. Regards, S. Moonesamy (as imapapdb WG Chair) _______________________________________________ imapext mailing list imapext@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imapext