From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 22 23:41:43 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA21069 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:41:43 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CAKb4-0006QX-A9 for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:48:42 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAKTd-0002Pp-NK; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:41:01 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAKSZ-0002Hf-W4 for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:39:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id XAA20983 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:39:52 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zcars04e.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.56]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CAKZH-0006OP-F9 for lemonade@ietf.org; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:46:51 -0400 Received: from zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com (zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com [47.140.202.35]) by zcars04e.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id i8N3dMb29842 for ; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:39:22 -0400 (EDT) Received: by zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:39:22 -0400 Message-ID: <085091CB2CA14E4B8B163FFC37C84E9DFBE38F@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com> From: "Glenn Parsons" To: "'lemonade@ietf.org'" Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 23:39:04 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 0770535483960d190d4a0d020e7060bd Subject: [lemonade] Document status X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============0493411872==" Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Scan-Signature: 202a3ece0492a8c7e7c8672d5214398f This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --===============0493411872== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C4A11E.DEEFDDAF" This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4A11E.DEEFDDAF Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Folks, This is the chairs' current view of our documents. Editors & authors are encouraged to get new drafts needed to initiate WGLC posted no later than Sept 24th. This will allow a 2 week last call to close before our interim meeting and allow us to resolve any issues raised at that time. Glenn & Eric. In WG last call: 2004/Aug/09 draft-ietf-lemonade-notify-s2s-00.txt New draft expected ASAP to initiate WG last call (before Sept 24th): 2004/Jul/20 draft-ietf-lemonade-goals-03.txt -> 04 2004/Jan/09 draft-ietf-lemonade-catenate-01.txt -> 02 2004/Jul/09 draft-ietf-lemonade-urlauth-00.txt -> 01 2004/Jul/14 draft-newman-lemonade-burl-01.txt -> draft-ietf-lemonade-burl-00.txt 2004/Jul/22 draft-ietf-lemonade-futuredelivery-00.txt -> 01 2004/Jul/14 draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-00.txt -> 01 New draft expected for review (before Oct 8th): 2004/Jul/13 draft-ietf-lemonade-profile-00.txt -> 01 2004/Jul/20 draft-ietf-lemonade-imap-channel-02.txt -> 02 or ?? 2004/Aug/19 draft-ietf-lemonade-reconnect-01.txt -> 02 Abandoned: 2003/Oct/27 draft-ietf-lemonade-submit-01.txt 2004/Jul/13 draft-ietf-lemonade-msg-context-00.txt Not a WG document: 2004/Jul/19 draft-ietf-lemonade-server-to-client-notifications-00.txt ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4A11E.DEEFDDAF Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Document status

Folks,

This is the chairs' = current view of our documents.

Editors & = authors are encouraged to get new drafts needed to initiate WGLC posted = no later than Sept 24th.  This will allow a 2 week last call to = close before our interim meeting and allow us to resolve any issues = raised at that time.

Glenn & = Eric.


In WG last = call:

2004/Aug/09    = draft-ietf-lemonade-notify-s2s-00.txt

New draft = expected ASAP to initiate WG last call (before Sept 24th):

2004/Jul/20      = draft-ietf-lemonade-goals-03.txt  -> 04
2004/Jan/09     = draft-ietf-lemonade-catenate-01.txt -> 02
2004/Jul/09      = draft-ietf-lemonade-urlauth-00.txt  -> 01
2004/Jul/14      = draft-newman-lemonade-burl-01.txt  -> = draft-ietf-lemonade-burl-00.txt
2004/Jul/22      = draft-ietf-lemonade-futuredelivery-00.txt -> 01
2004/Jul/14     = draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-00.txt -> 01

New draft = expected for review (before Oct 8th):

2004/Jul/13     = draft-ietf-lemonade-profile-00.txt -> 01
2004/Jul/20     = draft-ietf-lemonade-imap-channel-02.txt -> 02 or ??
2004/Aug/19   = draft-ietf-lemonade-reconnect-01.txt -> 02

Abandoned:

2003/Oct/27     = draft-ietf-lemonade-submit-01.txt
2004/Jul/13      = draft-ietf-lemonade-msg-context-00.txt

Not a WG = document:=20

2004/Jul/19     = draft-ietf-lemonade-server-to-client-notifications-00.txt

------_=_NextPart_001_01C4A11E.DEEFDDAF-- --===============0493411872== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade --===============0493411872==-- From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 23 01:09:49 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA27495 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:09:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CALyJ-00083o-PR for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:16:47 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CALqe-00017g-SN; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:08:52 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CALoS-0000dX-Kt for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:06:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA27139 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:06:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mxout6.cac.washington.edu ([140.142.33.20]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CALvA-0007zW-Ax for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 01:13:33 -0400 Received: from shiva0.cac.washington.edu (shiva0.cac.washington.edu [140.142.37.170]) by mxout6.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8N56XwE008276; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:06:33 -0700 Received: from localhost (mrc@localhost) by shiva0.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8N56Xbk012427; Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:06:33 -0700 Date: Wed, 22 Sep 2004 22:06:33 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin To: Glenn Parsons Subject: Re: [lemonade] Document status In-Reply-To: <085091CB2CA14E4B8B163FFC37C84E9DFBE38F@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com> Message-ID: References: <085091CB2CA14E4B8B163FFC37C84E9DFBE38F@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08e48e05374109708c00c6208b534009 Cc: "'lemonade@ietf.org'" X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7a6398bf8aaeabc7a7bb696b6b0a2aad I apologize; I didn't realize that URLAUTH -01 was not on the I-D repository. I've just submitted it. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 23 16:00:51 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA16438 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:00:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CAZsk-0008Vb-Fy for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:07:58 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAZZA-0007xM-Ta; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:47:44 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAZXR-00076T-V4; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:45:57 -0400 Received: from CNRI.Reston.VA.US (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA15281; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:45:55 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <200409231945.PAA15281@ietf.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" To: i-d-announce@ietf.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 15:45:55 -0400 Cc: lemonade@ietf.org Subject: [lemonade] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-lemonade-urlauth-01.txt X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.4 (/) X-Scan-Signature: e1b0e72ff1bbd457ceef31828f216a86 --NextPart A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service environments Working Group of the IETF. Title : Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) - URLAUTH Extension Author(s) : M. Crispin Filename : draft-ietf-lemonade-urlauth-01.txt Pages : 0 Date : 2004-9-23 This document describes the URLAUTH extension to the Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) (RFC 3501) and the IMAP URL Scheme (IMAPURL) (RFC 2192). This extension provides a means by which an IMAP client can use URLs carrying authorization to access limited message data on the IMAP server. An IMAP server which supports this extension indicates this with a capability name of "URLAUTH". A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-lemonade-urlauth-01.txt To remove yourself from the I-D Announcement list, send a message to i-d-announce-request@ietf.org with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message. You can also visit https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/I-D-announce to change your subscription settings. 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-lemonade-urlauth-01.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-lemonade-urlauth-01.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: <2004-9-23161345.I-D@ietf.org> ENCODING mime FILE /internet-drafts/draft-ietf-lemonade-urlauth-01.txt --OtherAccess Content-Type: Message/External-body; name="draft-ietf-lemonade-urlauth-01.txt"; site="ftp.ietf.org"; access-type="anon-ftp"; directory="internet-drafts" Content-Type: text/plain Content-ID: <2004-9-23161345.I-D@ietf.org> --OtherAccess-- --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade --NextPart-- From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 23 16:38:15 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA21217 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:38:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CAaSu-0001bE-4W for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:45:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAaCi-0005iW-Mo; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:28:36 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CAa5d-0001Km-5E for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:21:17 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id QAA19833 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:21:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mxout4.cac.washington.edu ([140.142.33.19]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CAaCT-0001Cm-Pj for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 16:28:22 -0400 Received: from shiva0.cac.washington.edu (shiva0.cac.washington.edu [140.142.37.170]) by mxout4.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8NKLE1J019843 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:21:14 -0700 Received: from localhost (mrc@localhost) by shiva0.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8NKL9lV004477 for ; Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:21:14 -0700 Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2004 13:21:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin To: lemonade@ietf.org Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7baded97d9887f7a0c7e8a33c2e3ea1b Subject: [lemonade] draft -01 of the URLAUTH document X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 This document has relatively minor editorial changes that I made last July but apparently did not post. As far as I know, it addresses all the pending issues to the URLAUTH document that have been called to my attention. Since there is going to be an interim Lemonade meeting on October 12, I assume that anything that's needed for draft -02 will come out there, and I expect to get it posted by the October 25 cutoff for the Washington DC IETF meeting. I call the WG's attention in particular to the following discussion item: ;;; Earlier versions of this document had access identifiers for "any ;;; authorized user" and anonymous. These were not needed for Lemonade ;;; submit-without-download and were removed. Should something of this ;;; nature be put back in? I also want to call attention to the named mechanism capability. The intent of this is to make it possible for other applications to have client-generated URLAUTHs as was envisioned in the earlier drafts. This also was not needed for Lemonade submit-without-download, and was removed. In both cases, the removal was to neutralize security objections to the overall specification. It was clear that many people were uncomfortable with Lemonade endorsing a model which required "any authorized user" and anonymous access identifiers, as well as client-generated URLAUTHs. The question is, now that these requirements are gone, and we seem to be satisfied that the required provisions are secure, is it possible to add these as optional facilities? Or should this possibility be shelved until after the current URLAUTH is finished, to be offered as extensions by after Lemonade concludes its work? As far as I'm concerned, it's whatever is the path of least resistance. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 27 12:35:29 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA11406 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:35:29 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CByb0-0000pU-IV for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:43:27 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CByRJ-0004TX-Nu; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:33:25 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CByJM-0003ZV-GZ for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:25:13 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA10802 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:25:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from salvelinus.brooktrout.com ([204.176.205.6]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CByR0-0000f5-Hl for lemonade@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:33:07 -0400 Received: from nhmail2.needham.brooktrout.com (nhmail2.eng.brooktrout.com [204.176.205.242]) by salvelinus.brooktrout.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i8RGKikT004481 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:20:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: by nhmail2.eng.brooktrout.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:18:12 -0400 Message-ID: From: Eric Burger To: lemonade@ietf.org Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:18:08 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Subject: [lemonade] Media Conversion X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab At IETF 60, we had a discussion on whether CHANNEL (1) still existed and, if so, (2) can do media conversion. A summary of the discussion: Content adaptation could be added to IMAP URL spec. Is it a client request or server feature? Most don't like idea of server doing it automatically (think OPES). What do we mean by media conversion? Streaming conversion (e.g., codecs) or document conversion (e.g., MS Word to HTML)? Consensus to work on streaming conversion first, and then address document conversion. The floor is open for discussion. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 27 12:38:39 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA11534 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:38:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CBye5-0000sD-0D for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:46:37 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CByRJ-0004Tc-TY; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:33:25 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CByJR-0003bA-Vp for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:25:18 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA10812 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:25:14 -0400 (EDT) Received: from salvelinus.brooktrout.com ([204.176.205.6]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CByR6-0000ff-Hv for lemonade@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:33:12 -0400 Received: from nhmail2.needham.brooktrout.com (nhmail2.eng.brooktrout.com [204.176.205.242]) by salvelinus.brooktrout.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i8RGKikS004482 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:20:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: by nhmail2.eng.brooktrout.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:18:13 -0400 Message-ID: From: Eric Burger To: lemonade@ietf.org Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:18:09 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Subject: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 We discussed at IETF 60 and the Dallas Interim whether we should have facilities in IMAP for compressing documents or if we should use transport-layer facilities for compressing everything. Seeding the discussion: P-IMAP and its brethren have special document manipulation commands that explicitly gzip the content. The server (or client) knows the document is compressed by the command (or parameter) used. Alternately, transport protocols such as TLS compress the entire stream. TLS with a null cipher gives compression without the cost of X.509 startup. Does anyone have DATA on the computational complexity, resulting compression ratio, and I/O impact (e.g., must scan entire document vs. compress on x Bytes)? _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 27 13:19:16 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA14074 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:19:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CBzHN-0001fE-Ix for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:27:14 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CByrt-0008Ee-Ej; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 13:00:53 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CByj5-0007Au-UN for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:51:47 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA12316 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:51:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no ([212.125.101.197]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CByqk-00017T-7S for lemonade@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:59:42 -0400 Received: by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AA7A01A6BC; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:51:42 +0200 (CEST) Received: from prosecco.oryx.com (prosecco.oryx.com [217.19.171.140]) by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with SMTP id 7C4B11A69D for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:51:40 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 18:51:40 +0200 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: lemonade@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Eric Burger writes: > Does anyone have DATA on the computational complexity, resulting > compression ratio, and I/O impact (e.g., must scan entire document > vs. compress on x Bytes)? I ran a few IMAP connection logs through something much like P-IMAP and something much like TLS compression last year, when I wrote the draft=compress. Not sure whether I still have the data. Can look tomorrow in the office. The conclusions are simple, anyway: synonyms (e.g. "F" for "FETCH") are meaningless, compressing the stream as it goes is good, compressing individual fetch responses less good. Arnt _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Mon Sep 27 14:51:13 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA20495 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:51:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CC0iN-0003QX-Ka for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:59:11 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CC0VU-0005rs-5L; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:45:52 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CC0QA-0004YH-64 for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:40:22 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA19625 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:40:20 -0400 (EDT) Received: from zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com ([47.129.242.57]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CC0Xp-0003BP-Pu for lemonade@ietf.org; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:48:18 -0400 Received: from zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com (zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com [47.140.202.35]) by zcars04f.nortelnetworks.com (Switch-2.2.6/Switch-2.2.0) with ESMTP id i8RIdnf18438 for ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:39:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: by zrtpd0jn.us.nortel.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:39:49 -0400 Message-ID: <085091CB2CA14E4B8B163FFC37C84E9D0175D6CE@zcarhxm0.corp.nortel.com> From: "Glenn Parsons" To: "'lemonade@ietf.org'" Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 14:39:38 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) X-Spam-Score: 0.6 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 4d87d2aa806f79fed918a62e834505ca Subject: [lemonade] WG last call on MMS mapping X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============1287246954==" Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.9 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 25620135586de10c627e3628c432b04a This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. --===============1287246954== Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C4A4C1.581EF349" This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4A4C1.581EF349 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Folks, A two week last call period is open until midnight EDT Oct 11th on: Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail Please forward any comments on this document to the WG mailing list. Cheers, Glenn. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C4A4C1.581EF349 Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" WG last call on MMS mapping

Folks,

A two week last call period is open until midnight EDT Oct 11th on:

    Mapping Between MMS and Internet Mail    
    <draft-ietf-lemonade-mms-mapping-00.txt>

Please forward any comments on this document to the WG mailing list.

Cheers,
Glenn.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C4A4C1.581EF349-- --===============1287246954== Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade --===============1287246954==-- From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 02:32:47 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00560 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:32:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCBfO-0002da-Q1 for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:40:51 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCBWk-0008Li-Tr; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:31:54 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCBT4-0007v1-Sa for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:28:07 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00375 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:28:05 -0400 (EDT) From: Corby.Wilson@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x1.nokia.com ([131.228.20.21]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCBap-0002ZL-Sh for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:36:09 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x1.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8S6Ru106412; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:27:56 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:27:25 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8S6RPAl008853; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:27:25 +0300 Received: from mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.97) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00GRta3n; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:27:23 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8S6RCS12343; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:27:12 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe004.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.104]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:27:11 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:27:10 -0500 Message-ID: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D35@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer Thread-Index: AcSktmBukineNuyJQhO54uxzp5tPDQAbTynA To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2004 06:27:11.0778 (UTC) FILETIME=[301C4020:01C4A524] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cab78e1e39c4b328567edb48482b6a69 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable I'm glad you brought this up Eric. I think this is needed for low bandwidth terminals. Computational power of terminals is growing faster than network bandwidth at the current time, so I feel this is a key technology. I think TLS compression is fine, but for consumer level systems which will not be enabling IMAPS (simply because they don't know what it is) I think we will need application level compression (like P-IMAPs GZIP). I agree with Arnt that stream compression is better than individual message compression, but we may be able to define both. Corby > -----Original Message----- > From: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lemonade-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of ext Arnt Gulbrandsen > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 12:52 PM > To: lemonade@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer >=20 > Eric Burger writes: > > Does anyone have DATA on the computational complexity, resulting > > compression ratio, and I/O impact (e.g., must scan entire document > > vs. compress on x Bytes)? >=20 > I ran a few IMAP connection logs through something much like P-IMAP and > something much like TLS compression last year, when I wrote the > draft=3Dcompress. >=20 > Not sure whether I still have the data. Can look tomorrow in the office. > The conclusions are simple, anyway: synonyms (e.g. "F" for "FETCH") are > meaningless, compressing the stream as it goes is good, compressing > individual fetch responses less good. >=20 > Arnt >=20 > _______________________________________________ > lemonade mailing list > lemonade@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 02:37:58 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00887 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:37:58 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCBkQ-0002iH-KO for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:46:02 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCBba-0000PR-UQ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:36:54 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCBaR-0000Jq-IF for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:35:44 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id CAA00731 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:35:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Corby.Wilson@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x3.nokia.com ([131.228.20.26]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCBiC-0002fL-MF for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 02:43:46 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x3.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8S6Zeg10248; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:35:40 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:31:28 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8S6VS2P025907; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:31:28 +0300 Received: from mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.97) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00GLWhQL; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:31:27 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8S6VLS15300; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:31:21 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe004.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.104]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:31:21 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [lemonade] Media Conversion Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 01:31:19 -0500 Message-ID: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D36@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: [lemonade] Media Conversion Thread-Index: AcSksDkc6Np6SoZaT12CB4FAWCyGbAAdAWyw To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2004 06:31:21.0012 (UTC) FILETIME=[C4AA5740:01C4A524] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0ddefe323dd869ab027dbfff7eff0465 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 3e15cc4fdc61d7bce84032741d11c8e5 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Vote yes that we need this. Media conversion should be requested by the client since the client knows it's capabilities (eg. Just downloaded PDF viewer and don't need to convert the doc). There is a question of how the IMAP client interacts with the onboard browser and whether the client can even launch the browser and return to the IMAP client after viewing of the HTML doc is done. I think this is an implementation detail and may not need to be addressed by Lemonade. Corby > -----Original Message----- > From: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lemonade-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of ext Eric Burger > Sent: Monday, September 27, 2004 12:18 PM > To: lemonade@ietf.org > Subject: [lemonade] Media Conversion >=20 > At IETF 60, we had a discussion on whether CHANNEL (1) still existed and, > if > so, (2) can do media conversion. >=20 > A summary of the discussion: >=20 > Content adaptation could be added to IMAP URL spec. Is it a client > request > or server feature? Most don't like idea of server doing it automatically > (think OPES). >=20 > What do we mean by media conversion? Streaming conversion (e.g., codecs) > or > document conversion (e.g., MS Word to HTML)? >=20 > Consensus to work on streaming conversion first, and then address document > conversion. >=20 >=20 > The floor is open for discussion. >=20 > _______________________________________________ > lemonade mailing list > lemonade@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 09:32:55 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21832 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:32:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCIE2-0001Qq-AT for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:41:03 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCHxj-0003r7-Da; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:24:11 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCHtg-0002Zr-Pw for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:20:00 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21037 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:19:59 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no ([212.125.101.197]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCI1W-0001Ah-7i for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:28:06 -0400 Received: by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix, from userid 1000) id AA5911A6BD; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:19:58 +0200 (CEST) Received: from prosecco.oryx.com (prosecco.oryx.com [217.19.171.140]) by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with SMTP id 6B8FA1A6C1 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:19:56 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: <1hKsuGQsJ0H7hL29feRHag.md5@prosecco.oryx.com> Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:19:56 +0200 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: lemonade@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1 Arnt Gulbrandsen writes: > Not sure whether I still have the data. Can look tomorrow in the office. Sorry, no. I took threee IMAP sessions from different clients and made the following five transmfomations on each: 1. I replaced every keyword with its first letter, to see what effect terse synonyms have. (This broke the IMAP stream, e.g. FETCH and FLAGS both mapped to F, but I didn't care about that detail. I just wanted an estimated total number of bytes.) 2. I used libz on the stream. From client to server I added Z_SYNC_FLUSH after each command. In the other direction I added Z_SYNC_FLUSH after each tagged response. 3. I used gzip -9 on each response independently. 4. As 1+2. 5. As 1+3. Sadly, I don't have the resulting transformed files. From memory, 2 was the best. 4 was the same as 2 (but I liked 2 better because it was cleaner). 3 was somewhat less good -- as I recall, it was hurt mostly by 'body[header.fields (...)]' fetches. As a result, I wrote the now expired draft for compress=deflate. If there's substantial interest, I could redo it. Arnt _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 09:33:45 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21907 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:33:45 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCIEr-0001SB-0Q for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:41:53 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCHxk-0003re-OI; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:24:12 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCHwX-0003T3-4i for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:22:57 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21175 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:22:55 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no ([212.125.101.197]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCI4M-0001DJ-Tw for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:31:03 -0400 Received: by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4AA8A1A6BB; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:22:55 +0200 (CEST) Received: from prosecco.oryx.com (prosecco.oryx.com [217.19.171.140]) by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with SMTP id 09BD21A6B6 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:22:53 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 15:22:52 +0200 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: lemonade@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer References: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D35@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> <01LFE1SV1UR400005R@mauve.mrochek.com> In-Reply-To: <01LFE1SV1UR400005R@mauve.mrochek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 68c8cc8a64a9d0402e43b8eee9fc4199 X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 ned.freed@mrochek.com writes: >> I agree with Arnt that stream compression is better than individual >> message compression, but we may be able to define both. > > Just because we can do something doesn't mean that we should. Let's _please_ not. More code to debug is a pain. More optional bits and pieces in the protocol harm interoperation (unless both client and server are tested to interoperate in every possible configuration, ha ha ha ha *cough* *cough*). Arnt _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 09:56:48 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA23178 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:56:47 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCIbA-0001qN-6B for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:04:56 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCIR2-0007bJ-9L; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:54:28 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCIPM-0007Sv-9N for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:52:44 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA22973 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:52:42 -0400 (EDT) From: Corby.Wilson@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x3.nokia.com ([131.228.20.26]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCIX9-0001ku-8I for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:00:50 -0400 Received: from esdks003.ntc.nokia.com (esdks003.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.158]) by mgw-x3.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8SDqYg21036; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:52:35 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:49:19 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks003.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8SDnJGg031583; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:49:19 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks003.ntc.nokia.com 00JmvuH9; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:49:17 EEST Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh002.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.122]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8SDnFY24755; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:49:15 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe004.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.104]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:48:53 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:48:52 -0500 Message-ID: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D63@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer Thread-Index: AcSlWem7RgzQaKd8Saq3+8ZVTt/q2gAA/TqQ To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2004 13:48:53.0588 (UTC) FILETIME=[E46B8940:01C4A561] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b280b4db656c3ca28dd62e5e0b03daa8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: lemonade@ietf.org, eburger@brooktrout.com, arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 73734d43604d52d23b3eba644a169745 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable >From an operator's perspective, any feature which reduces bandwidth performance is a good thing. So they would want compression at any level. However, TLS connections over GPRS networks tend to be expensive to setup and difficult to maintain (at least today). Another consideration is battery drain. TLS connections tend to be a big load on the battery because of the computational power required to decrypt + decompress the stream. App level compression would improve battery life, but would still require more power than no compression at all. In order to improve the acceptance of email client applications on mobile terminals we need to make it as user friendly to the common consumer (90% of the market) as possible. While enterprises are happy with TLS compression (or IPSec, MOBIKE, VPN services), allot of operators today don't offer IMAP/S access to the ISP email server or require a business/enterprise level contract (not to mention Hotmail, Yahoo mail, etc.) If we can add an extension to the server at the application layer the user/operator doesn't have to be aware that it exists at all. The capability is negotiated by the client and server, not configured by the user. Another problem is the idea of using IMAP server to client notifications or IMAP-to-MMS mapping. In these instances a TLS connection is not possible and we may want to add compression technology for transporting email messages over MMS networks or OOB OTA email delivery. To summarize, I understand you objection and agree if we were designing for desktop systems, but Lemonade needs to consider both enterprise and consumer based mobile systems where certain technologies are either unavailable or unwieldy, requiring us to look at alternative methods to deliver the same benefits. If we can come up with something that does not require compression in order to increase bandwidth utilization, I'm all for it. In the end we need to make mobile email as painless as possible, and forcing TLS to compress email will make mobile email clients more unwieldy than they already are. Corby > -----Original Message----- > From: ext ned.freed@mrochek.com [mailto:ned.freed@mrochek.com] > Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 8:44 AM > To: Wilson Corby (Nokia-ES/Pittsburgh) > Cc: eburger@snowshore.com; lemonade@ietf.org; arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no > Subject: RE: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer >=20 > > I'm glad you brought this up Eric. I think this is needed for low > > bandwidth terminals. Computational power of terminals is growing faster > > than network bandwidth at the current time, so I feel this is a key > > technology. >=20 > > I think TLS compression is fine, but for consumer level systems which > > will not be enabling IMAPS (simply because they don't know what it is) I > > think we will need application level compression (like P-IMAPs GZIP). >=20 > Ignorance is never an excuse. I also fail to see why someone would be > ignorant > of one mechanism but aware of another. >=20 > > I agree with Arnt that stream compression is better than individual > > message compression, but we may be able to define both. >=20 > Just because we can do something doesn't mean that we should. Less is > almost > always more, and unless there's a compelling technical advantage to > performing > application layer compression (which is why DATA is important), we have no > business defining it. >=20 > Ned _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 10:09:07 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA23941 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:09:06 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCIn2-00024A-B7 for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:17:15 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCIbD-0001rC-6S; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:04:59 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCIVr-00089x-SQ for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:59:27 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA23313 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 09:59:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Corby.Wilson@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x4.nokia.com ([131.228.20.27]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCIde-0001ss-Tl for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:07:34 -0400 Received: from esdks003.ntc.nokia.com (esdks003.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.158]) by mgw-x4.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8SDxLT23283; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:59:21 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:59:06 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks003.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8SDx6U3002777; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:59:06 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks003.ntc.nokia.com 0074jHg7; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:59:05 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8SDwvY02868; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 16:58:58 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe004.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.104]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:58:03 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 08:58:02 -0500 Message-ID: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D68@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer Thread-Index: AcSlYETVtwF2SpPCQv27G6nKbR0ZzgAAk5/Q To: , X-OriginalArrivalTime: 28 Sep 2004 13:58:03.0309 (UTC) FILETIME=[2C144DD0:01C4A563] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: b19722fc8d3865b147c75ae2495625f2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 69a74e02bbee44ab4f8eafdbcedd94a1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable If the cost benefit analysis doesn't give us the advantage, then of course we shouldn't add this. I'm not pushing for anything. I do think it's an interesting idea and we can discuss this at the face to face next month if people want to. Corby > -----Original Message----- > From: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lemonade-bounces@ietf.org] On > Behalf Of ext Arnt Gulbrandsen > Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 9:23 AM > To: lemonade@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer >=20 > ned.freed@mrochek.com writes: > >> I agree with Arnt that stream compression is better than individual > >> message compression, but we may be able to define both. > > > > Just because we can do something doesn't mean that we should. >=20 > Let's _please_ not. More code to debug is a pain. More optional bits and > pieces in the protocol harm interoperation (unless both client and > server are tested to interoperate in every possible configuration, ha > ha ha ha *cough* *cough*). >=20 > Arnt >=20 > _______________________________________________ > lemonade mailing list > lemonade@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 12:40:13 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA03540 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:40:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCL9L-0004pd-UL for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:48:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCKtc-0008P4-63; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:32:08 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCKhS-0005zP-Kp for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:19:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id MAA02420 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:19:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no ([212.125.101.197]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with smtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCKpA-0004Qg-2Q for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 12:27:42 -0400 Received: by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D08531A6C0; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:19:22 +0200 (CEST) Received: from prosecco.oryx.com (prosecco.oryx.com [217.19.171.140]) by bra.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with SMTP id 829F41A6BD for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:19:20 +0200 (CEST) Message-Id: Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 18:19:20 +0200 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: lemonade@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer References: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D63@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> In-Reply-To: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D63@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 97adf591118a232206bdb5a27b217034 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8b30eb7682a596edff707698f4a80f7d Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Corby.Wilson@nokia.com writes: > From an operator's perspective, any feature which reduces bandwidth > performance is a good thing. So they would want compression at any > level. > However, TLS connections over GPRS networks tend to be expensive to > setup and difficult to maintain (at least today). If you use the null cipher, that shouldn't be the case. > Another consideration is battery drain. TLS connections tend to be a > big load on the battery because of the computational power required > to decrypt + decompress the stream. App level compression would > improve battery life, but would still require more power than no > compression at all. Right. But you can get the same from TLS by using the null cipher. =2E.. > In the end we need to make mobile email as painless as possible, and > forcing TLS to compress email will make mobile email clients more > unwieldy than they already are. Do you want to know my neighbour's password? I don't know which neighbour it is - just someone whose WLAN AP covers my living room. I know he/she uses IMAP, I'll bet I could see both password and lots of juicy private mail. If you insist on "NO TLS!" on wireless devices, then you're forcing your customers' email out into the open, where nasties like me can listen, and that's going to be painful for your customers. On the other hand, if you use TLS, then you can either use the null cipher for better battery lifetime, or you can use real crypto. Arnt _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Tue Sep 28 14:08:13 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id OAA08647 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:08:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCMWU-0006Uq-SN for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:16:23 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCMIT-0006Jy-16; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 14:01:53 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCM3l-0003Nb-PZ for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:46:41 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id NAA07393 for ; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:46:40 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mxout3.cac.washington.edu ([140.142.32.166]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCMBd-00064o-Pa for lemonade@ietf.org; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 13:54:50 -0400 Received: from smtp.washington.edu (smtp.washington.edu [140.142.33.9]) by mxout3.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8SHkawk007516; Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:46:37 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8SHkZtg012836 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:46:36 -0700 Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2004 10:46:37 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: Mark Crispin To: Arnt Gulbrandsen Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer In-Reply-To: Message-ID: References: <78E9902B779FD5428DB035B5F6A50EFB02409D63@daebe004.americas.nokia.com> Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Cc: lemonade@ietf.org X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 On Tue, 28 Sep 2004, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: > If you insist on "NO TLS!" on wireless devices, then you're forcing your > customers' email out into the open, where nasties like me can listen, > and that's going to be painful for your customers. I concur with this assessment. Just about the only unencrypted authenticated service that we have left is IMAP with Kerberos authentication, and that may go away soon since hardly anyone uses it. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 29 09:33:46 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA02516 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:33:46 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCeic-0006a3-Rd for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:42:07 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCeJW-0007Kl-6W; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:16:10 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCeFQ-00063k-6c for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:11:56 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA00527 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:11:54 -0400 (EDT) Received: from salvelinus.brooktrout.com ([204.176.205.6]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCeNS-00068L-Ee for lemonade@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:20:15 -0400 Received: from nhmail2.needham.brooktrout.com (nhmail2.eng.brooktrout.com [204.176.205.242]) by salvelinus.brooktrout.com (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id i8TD5gt7004675; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:05:48 -0400 (EDT) Received: by nhmail2.eng.brooktrout.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:03:11 -0400 Message-ID: From: Eric Burger To: Corby.Wilson@nokia.com Subject: RE: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:03:09 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: f60d0f7806b0c40781eee6b9cd0b2135 Cc: lemonade@ietf.org X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: fb6060cb60c0cea16e3f7219e40a0a81 Is gzip less expensive than TLS with null cipher?. TLS works on the stream (e.g., 8KB or pick your favorite size) at a time, not on the entire message (including data). This could very well result in fewer instructions, meaning less battery drain. That said, that is why I was wondering about the compression performance of TLS vs. gzip. I also have serious protocol issues with application-layer compression. Today we might like gzip. Tomorrow we might like ZIP (ignoring IPR issues...). The day after we might want FOOBAR. After that, BARFOO takes hold. Service provider Z wants to use their proprietary compression program. That means the protocol needs to support application-layer compression method negotiation. TLS, SIGCOMP, et al. have solved this already. > -----Original Message----- > From: Arnt Gulbrandsen [mailto:arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no] > Sent: Tuesday, September 28, 2004 12:19 PM > To: lemonade@ietf.org > Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer > > > Corby.Wilson@nokia.com writes: > > From an operator's perspective, any feature which reduces bandwidth > > performance is a good thing. So they would want compression at any > > level. > > However, TLS connections over GPRS networks tend to be expensive to > > setup and difficult to maintain (at least today). > > If you use the null cipher, that shouldn't be the case. > > > Another consideration is battery drain. TLS connections > tend to be a > > big load on the battery because of the computational power required > > to decrypt + decompress the stream. App level compression would > > improve battery life, but would still require more power than no > > compression at all. > > Right. But you can get the same from TLS by using the null cipher. > > ... > > In the end we need to make mobile email as painless as > possible, and > > forcing TLS to compress email will make mobile email clients more > > unwieldy than they already are. > > Do you want to know my neighbour's password? I don't know which > neighbour it is - just someone whose WLAN AP covers my living room. I > know he/she uses IMAP, I'll bet I could see both password and lots of > juicy private mail. > > If you insist on "NO TLS!" on wireless devices, then you're > forcing your > customers' email out into the open, where nasties like me can listen, > and that's going to be painful for your customers. On the other hand, > if you use TLS, then you can either use the null cipher for better > battery lifetime, or you can use real crypto. > > Arnt > > _______________________________________________ > lemonade mailing list > lemonade@ietf.org > https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade > _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 29 10:16:35 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA07008 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:16:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCfO5-0007Zo-0B for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:24:57 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCf8H-0002sj-Cb; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:08:37 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCesG-0005L9-69 for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:52:04 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA04372 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 09:52:02 -0400 (EDT) Received: from libertango.oryx.com ([195.30.94.163]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCf09-00074O-8S for lemonade@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 10:00:23 -0400 Message-Id: Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 15:51:51 +0200 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: lemonade@ietf.org Subject: Re: [lemonade] Compression: TLS or Application-layer References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Cc: Eric Burger , Corby.Wilson@nokia.com X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 0bc60ec82efc80c84b8d02f4b0e4de22 Eric Burger writes: > > > Is gzip less expensive than TLS with null cipher?. Effectively it's the same in terms of CPU. There are minor differences wrt. data formats and padding. > TLS works on the stream (e.g., 8KB or pick your favorite size) at a > time, not on the entire message (including data). This could very > well result in fewer instructions, meaning less battery drain. That > said, that is why I was wondering about the compression performance > of TLS vs. gzip. They both using the algorithm from RFC 1950. The wrapping is different, but that's small details. GZIP uses RFC1952 wrapping, TLS RFC 1951. Or the other way around. (I don't remember any 8k block, btw. I seem to remember a 16-byte block somewhere in TLS, and of course there is the LZ77 rolling window in RFC 1950.) Arnt _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Wed Sep 29 22:41:10 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA15751 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:41:09 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCr0j-0001po-I3 for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:49:38 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCqiC-0001ky-03; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:30:28 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCqVn-0008UB-Cc for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:17:39 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id WAA14547 for ; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:17:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x1.nokia.com ([131.228.20.21]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCqdw-0001RV-2i for lemonade@ietf.org; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:26:05 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x1.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8U2HZ120986 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:17:36 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:17:20 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8U2HKEL014603 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:17:20 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00iLoptw; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:17:18 EEST Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh002.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.122]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8U2HCY11748 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 05:17:12 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe005.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.105]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Wed, 29 Sep 2004 21:17:11 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 21:17:11 -0500 Message-ID: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A016D3A96@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY Thread-Index: AcSmk5ekh7o7eqy0QV+soSQQTvtZtw== To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Sep 2004 02:17:12.0105 (UTC) FILETIME=[986F4990:01C4A693] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 08170828343bcf1325e4a0fb4584481c Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Should UIDVALIDITY be mandatory? If by chance the granting server invalidates the UIDVALIDITY after = generating the URL how does the resolving (same as the granting) server = know if the UID is valid unless there is a UIDVALIDITY value? Maybe the = server would do an implicit RESETKEY when it knew it had invalidated the = UIDVALIDITY. Additionally, according to RFC3501 2.3.1.1, a server can legitimately = change UIDVALIDITY every session if it can not retain UIDs. Is it = intended that URLAUTH be allowed to work with such a server? I suppose = the answer is that such a server would never include URLAUTH in it's = capability string. Mike _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 01:29:23 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA27019 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:29:23 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCtdX-00055w-G7 for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:37:52 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCtRp-00032s-4F; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:25:45 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CCtQs-0002py-6Z for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:24:46 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id BAA26781 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:24:44 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mxout3.cac.washington.edu ([140.142.32.166]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CCtZ3-000521-CZ for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 01:33:13 -0400 Received: from shiva1.cac.washington.edu (shiva1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.37.171]) by mxout3.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8U5OiMa003622; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:24:44 -0700 Received: from localhost (mrc@localhost) by shiva1.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8U5OhpR001038; Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:24:44 -0700 Date: Wed, 29 Sep 2004 22:24:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin To: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Subject: Re: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY In-Reply-To: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A016D3A96@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Message-ID: References: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A016D3A96@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 Cc: lemonade@ietf.org X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: ffa9dfbbe7cc58b3fa6b8ae3e57b0aa3 On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 Michael.Wener@nokia.com wrote: > If by chance the granting server invalidates the UIDVALIDITY after > generating the URL how does the resolving (same as the granting) server > know if the UID is valid unless there is a UIDVALIDITY value? Maybe the > server would do an implicit RESETKEY when it knew it had invalidated the > UIDVALIDITY. Yes, I think that most (if not all) scenarios that involve a server changing UIDVALIDITY would also reset the keys. > Additionally, according to RFC3501 2.3.1.1, a server can legitimately > change UIDVALIDITY every session if it can not retain UIDs. Is it > intended that URLAUTH be allowed to work with such a server? I don't think that URLAUTH can work with such a server. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 09:20:11 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA18876 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:20:11 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD0zE-0007Ta-FN for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:28:45 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0hw-0006Kn-9U; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:10:52 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0fc-0005fe-4L for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:08:28 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA17747 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:08:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x3.nokia.com ([131.228.20.26]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD0nq-00079w-DK for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:16:59 -0400 Received: from esdks001.ntc.nokia.com (esdks001.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.120]) by mgw-x3.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UD8OK08184 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:08:24 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:08:10 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks001.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8UD8AHo009132 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:08:10 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks001.ntc.nokia.com 00tcbQbW; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:07:43 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UD7aY10016 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:07:36 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe005.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.105]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:07:23 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:07:22 -0500 Message-ID: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A015EA8E7@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: URLAUTH 01 and URL syntax Thread-Index: AcSm7mv5e5yNjCJ4R4irwVqA4NXFpQ== To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Sep 2004 13:07:23.0734 (UTC) FILETIME=[6D2D7760:01C4A6EE] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and URL syntax X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 1) Some of the examples have URL syntax errors as per the RFC2192 BNF. = For example ... imap://joe@server.com/INBOX;uid=3DN;section=3Dx.y Should be ... imap://joe@server.com/INBOX/;uid=3DN/;section=3Dx.y 2) In the section 6.3 example there is a URL generated with "authid". = Where is "authid" defined? 3) Should the URLAUTH BNF follow RFC2192 and have "/" separate iurlauth = from the rest of the terminals? For example ... iurlauth =3D "/" [expire] ";URLAUTH=3D" etc ... I have to admit RFC2192s placement of "/" is curious.=20 Mike _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 09:24:36 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA19295 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:24:35 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD13U-0007a7-Sl for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:33:10 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0ro-0008G3-Aq; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:21:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0i9-0006MO-UV for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:11:06 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA18012 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:11:03 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x3.nokia.com ([131.228.20.26]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD0qO-0007Ei-Ab for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:19:37 -0400 Received: from esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (esdks002.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.121]) by mgw-x3.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UDAxK11618 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:11:00 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:10:49 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8UDAna5017141 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:10:49 +0300 Received: from mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.97) by esdks002.ntc.nokia.com 00O1Bzyk; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:10:46 EEST Received: from daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh002.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.122]) by mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UDAcS08292 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:10:38 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe005.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.105]) by daebh002.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:10:37 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:10:37 -0500 Message-ID: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A015EA8E8@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY Thread-Index: AcSmk5ekh7o7eqy0QV+soSQQTvtZtwASwVgg To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Sep 2004 13:10:37.0586 (UTC) FILETIME=[E0B8EF20:01C4A6EE] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 856eb5f76e7a34990d1d457d8e8e5b7f Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7655788c23eb79e336f5f8ba8bce7906 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > -----Original Message----- > From: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org [mailto:lemonade-bounces@ietf.org]On > Behalf Of ext Michael.Wener@nokia.com > Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2004 10:17 PM ... > Should UIDVALIDITY be mandatory? ... The more I think about it it seems that IMAPURL should have made this = mandatory when the URL was referring to a message or message part. In a = sense the UID is being exported outside the context of it's originating = session. In this case, the 3-tuple (mailbox,uidvalidity,uid) defined in = rfc3501 2.3.1.1 should have been exported as a whole.=20 This RFC2192 has a date of 1997. Does anyone by chance know why it was = made optional? Am I missing something? Mike _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 09:39:22 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA20178 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:39:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD1Hn-0007uo-5W for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:47:56 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0tP-0000C6-DV; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:22:43 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD0mw-0007JX-Uu for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:16:03 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA18384 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:16:00 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x1.nokia.com ([131.228.20.21]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD0vB-0007Lf-Eg for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:24:34 -0400 Received: from esdks001.ntc.nokia.com (esdks001.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.120]) by mgw-x1.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UDFX108752; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:15:36 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:14:40 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks001.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8UDEesV029786; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:14:40 +0300 Received: from mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.96) by esdks001.ntc.nokia.com 00efbaDj; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:14:37 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int1.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UDEXY16687; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 16:14:33 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe005.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.105]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:14:10 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 08:14:09 -0500 Message-ID: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A015EA8E9@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY Thread-Index: AcSmrg6HDn5DRzGHQNWrIzBaHKTVEQAQSoNA To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Sep 2004 13:14:10.0750 (UTC) FILETIME=[5FC72DE0:01C4A6EF] X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: cf4fa59384e76e63313391b70cd0dd25 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Cc: lemonade@ietf.org X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 7d33c50f3756db14428398e2bdedd581 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable > On Wed, 29 Sep 2004 Michael.Wener@nokia.com wrote: > > If by chance the granting server invalidates the UIDVALIDITY after=20 > > generating the URL how does the resolving (same as the=20 > granting) server=20 > > know if the UID is valid unless there is a UIDVALIDITY=20 > value? Maybe the=20 > > server would do an implicit RESETKEY when it knew it had=20 > invalidated the=20 > > UIDVALIDITY. >=20 > Yes, I think that most (if not all) scenarios that involve a server=20 > changing UIDVALIDITY would also reset the keys. Should there be a clarifying paragraph for this? Mike _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 09:45:50 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21335 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:45:50 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD1O3-0008I9-82 for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:54:24 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD1BK-0005So-17; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:41:14 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD17N-0003C0-Ol for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:37:09 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA19948 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:37:07 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mxout5.cac.washington.edu ([140.142.32.135]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD1Fa-0007qg-IY for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:45:41 -0400 Received: from shiva1.cac.washington.edu (shiva1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.37.171]) by mxout5.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8UDb4ZS005075; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:37:05 -0700 Received: from localhost (mrc@localhost) by shiva1.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8UDb4EW012380; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:37:04 -0700 Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:37:04 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin To: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Subject: Re: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and URL syntax In-Reply-To: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A015EA8E7@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Message-ID: References: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A015EA8E7@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 8abaac9e10c826e8252866cbe6766464 Cc: lemonade@ietf.org X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 39bd8f8cbb76cae18b7e23f7cf6b2b9f On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 Michael.Wener@nokia.com wrote: > 1) Some of the examples have URL syntax errors as per the RFC2192 BNF. I have just posted draft -02 which amends this. > 2) In the section 6.3 example there is a URL generated with "authid". > Where is "authid" defined? This is a remant of an earlier syntax which has been replaced by access identifiers ("user+" in this case). Removed in draft -02. > 3) Should the URLAUTH BNF follow RFC2192 and have "/" separate iurlauth > from the rest of the terminals? For example ... iurlauth = "/" [expire] > ";URLAUTH=" etc ... No. Although it looks strange, RFC 2192 actually uses "/" delimiter is used to separate hierarchical elements. ;UID and ;SECTION are such elements: INBOX mailbox named INBOX INBOX/;UID=23 message with UID 23 in mailbox named INBOX INBOX/;UID=23/;SECTION=3 third section of message with UID 23 in mailbox named INBOX Other parameters merely modify the URI without changing the data being referenced. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 10:06:52 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id KAA22969 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:06:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD1iQ-0000OX-G9 for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 10:15:26 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD1Rc-0002Oa-U7; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:58:04 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD1FY-0007by-L8 for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:45:36 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id JAA21324 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:45:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mxout3.cac.washington.edu ([140.142.32.166]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD1Nn-0008G2-SM for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 09:54:08 -0400 Received: from shiva1.cac.washington.edu (shiva1.cac.washington.edu [140.142.37.171]) by mxout3.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8UDjY9M029346; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:45:34 -0700 Received: from localhost (mrc@localhost) by shiva1.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8UDjY8s012610; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:45:34 -0700 Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 06:45:34 -0700 (PDT) From: Mark Crispin To: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Subject: RE: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 and UIDVALIDITY In-Reply-To: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A015EA8E9@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Message-ID: References: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A015EA8E9@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 79899194edc4f33a41f49410777972f8 Cc: lemonade@ietf.org X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 9182cfff02fae4f1b6e9349e01d62f32 On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 Michael.Wener@nokia.com wrote: >> Yes, I think that most (if not all) scenarios that involve a server >> changing UIDVALIDITY would also reset the keys. > Should there be a clarifying paragraph for this? I don't think that it is necessary. Clearly the implications of not having a UIDVALIDITY in the URL must be considered. UIDVALIDITY doesn't change for specious reasons. Either the mail does not support the concept; or the mailbox is actually an entirely different mailbox that has the same name as a previous mailbox which was deleted; or something traumatic (and unexpected) happened that resulted in the loss and reconstruction of mailbox metadata. It's highly unlikely in any of these instances that keys metadata would survive. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 15:46:42 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA23909 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:46:42 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD71I-0000kw-Lg for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:55:19 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD6Xa-0006kL-3g; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:24:34 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD6Ve-0005jj-8V for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:22:34 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id PAA21973 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:22:31 -0400 (EDT) From: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Received: from mgw-x4.nokia.com ([131.228.20.27]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD6dv-0000Gw-TU for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 15:31:09 -0400 Received: from esdks001.ntc.nokia.com (esdks001.ntc.nokia.com [172.21.138.120]) by mgw-x4.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UJMAT14654 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:22:11 +0300 (EET DST) X-Scanned: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:21:00 +0300 Nokia Message Protector V1.3.31 2004060815 - RELEASE Received: (from root@localhost) by esdks001.ntc.nokia.com (8.12.9/8.12.9) id i8UJL0UX013645 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:21:00 +0300 Received: from mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (172.21.143.97) by esdks001.ntc.nokia.com 007SXSCL; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:20:59 EEST Received: from daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com (daebh001.americas.nokia.com [10.241.35.121]) by mgw-int2.ntc.nokia.com (Switch-2.2.8/Switch-2.2.8) with ESMTP id i8UJKwS10404 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 22:20:58 +0300 (EET DST) Received: from daebe005.NOE.Nokia.com ([10.241.35.105]) by daebh001.NOE.Nokia.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.6881); Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:20:28 -0500 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.0.6487.1 content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:20:28 -0500 Message-ID: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A016D3A9E@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Thread-Topic: URLAUTH 01 GENURLAUTH Response Thread-Index: AcSnIorsyVIG1QRMQnKZV2qKfOXuIw== To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 30 Sep 2004 19:20:28.0940 (UTC) FILETIME=[8BCCD4C0:01C4A722] X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 1ac7cc0a4cd376402b85bc1961a86ac2 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 GENURLAUTH Response X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Scan-Signature: d6b246023072368de71562c0ab503126 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable 1) Why is the GENURLAUTH Response not included in section 7? 2) If a multi-url GENURLAUTH command is processed, would multiple single = url GENURLAUTH responses be legal? For example: C: 1 GENURLAUTH INTERNAL INTERNAL S: * GENURLAUTH authurl1 S: * GENURLAUTH authurl2 S: 1 OK GENURLAUTH Completed Mike _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade From lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Thu Sep 30 17:53:51 2004 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA05695 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:53:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from megatron.ietf.org ([132.151.6.71]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD90P-0004yz-KR for lemonade-web-archive@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 18:02:30 -0400 Received: from localhost.localdomain ([127.0.0.1] helo=megatron.ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD8Wq-0002Jj-6a; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:31:56 -0400 Received: from odin.ietf.org ([132.151.1.176] helo=ietf.org) by megatron.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.32) id 1CD8M8-0005tI-BB for lemonade@megatron.ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:20:52 -0400 Received: from ietf-mx.ietf.org (ietf-mx.ietf.org [132.151.6.1]) by ietf.org (8.9.1a/8.9.1a) with ESMTP id RAA03785 for ; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:20:49 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mxout4.cac.washington.edu ([140.142.33.19]) by ietf-mx.ietf.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CD8UR-0004Fd-V7 for lemonade@ietf.org; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 17:29:28 -0400 Received: from smtp.washington.edu (smtp.washington.edu [140.142.33.9]) by mxout4.cac.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8ULKn1K016585; Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:20:50 -0700 Received: from Tomobiki-Cho.CAC.Washington.EDU (tomobiki-cho.cac.washington.edu [128.95.135.58]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.washington.edu (8.13.1+UW04.08/8.13.1+UW04.08) with ESMTP id i8ULKnJU008258 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5 bits=128 verify=NOT); Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:20:49 -0700 Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2004 14:18:47 -0700 (Pacific Daylight Time) From: Mark Crispin To: Michael.Wener@nokia.com Subject: Re: [lemonade] URLAUTH 01 GENURLAUTH Response In-Reply-To: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A016D3A9E@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Message-ID: References: <225A4E03D0EE5245A5C5F7E7B7C1F27A016D3A9E@daebe005.americas.nokia.com> Organization: Networks & Distributed Computing MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: de4f315c9369b71d7dd5909b42224370 Cc: lemonade@ietf.org X-BeenThere: lemonade@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Enhancements to Internet email to support diverse service enivronments List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org Errors-To: lemonade-bounces@ietf.org X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Scan-Signature: 798b2e660f1819ae38035ac1d8d5e3ab On Thu, 30 Sep 2004 Michael.Wener@nokia.com wrote: > 1) Why is the GENURLAUTH Response not included in section 7? It was overlooked. I'll put it in draft -03. > 2) If a multi-url GENURLAUTH command is processed, would multiple single > url GENURLAUTH responses be legal? It is certainly permitted within the IMAP framework, but it's probably not a good idea for a server to do it. -- Mark -- http://staff.washington.edu/mrc Science does not emerge from voting, party politics, or public debate. Si vis pacem, para bellum. _______________________________________________ lemonade mailing list lemonade@ietf.org https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade