Subject: RE: draft-gellens-pop3ext-07.txt
From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
To: "Mike Gahrns (Exchange)" <[email-masked]>, "'Randall Gellens'" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1998 10:56:27 -0700

At 9:17 PM -0700 8/18/98, Mike Gahrns (Exchange) wrote:

>The UIDL parameter may also fall in this category.  I have heard that some
>servers don't allow the UIDL command, because they don't want to have
>clients leave mail on the server.

If a site doesn't want users to leave mail on the server, disabling
UIDL is a pretty crude way of doing it.  It also makes it harder for
clients to properly download and delete mail in the case of an aborted
session.

That said, I don't have strong feelings either way on per-user UIDL and
LOGIN-DELAY.

From: "Mike Gahrns (Exchange)" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Randall Gellens'" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: RE: draft-gellens-pop3ext-07.txt
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 21:17:42 -0700
Sender: [email-masked]

a minor comment on draft-07

Seems that LOGIN-DELAY is a parameter that one might reasonably want to set
on a per-user basis.  e.g. The common users might have a setting of 600
seconds, but the executives might be allowed to poll every minute.  I know
that we have a class of users that demand to get "instant" notification of
messages arriving.

Thus, under "possible differences" for LOGIN-DELAY, you might want to change
no to yes, and then add the spiel you have under "EXPIRE" about if the
server has a per-user setting. e.g.  it SHOULD announce the more accurate
version is in the transaction state and append the USER token to the
LOGIN-DELAY. The server should advertise maximum possible Login delay in the
AUTHORIZATION state.

The UIDL parameter may also fall in this category.  I have heard that some
servers don't allow the UIDL command, because they don't want to have
clients leave mail on the server.  The ability to leave mail on the server,
certainly could be a reasonable per-user setting.  Using just EXPIRE 0 to
indicate the client is not permitted to leave mail on the server won't work
in this case won't work, because you'd be falsing advertising that the
server supported UIDL. 

That said, unlike EXPIRE, where we currently have a per-user settings in our
server, we do not have  a per-user setting for LOGIN-DELAY and UIDL.  Thus I
don't feel strongly about the above.  Since the doc is already structured
for the per-user setting case of EXPIRE, it seemed that it would be simple
to treat LOGIN-DELAY and UIDL similiarly to EXPIRE without really adding any
more complexity to the doc.  I thought I would throw the comment out to the
list, since I could see these as being reasonable per-user settings.  I
definitely do not intend this to re-open the doc and re-start the design of
it. If you feel that these would be reasonable per-user settings, then it
may be worth doing a minor change to note that they might be.  I do not want
to open a pandora's box of new changes to the draft, so pls limit any
comments as to whether it is reasonable that these two parameters might be
settable per-user.

-----Original Message-----
From: Randall Gellens [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 1998 6:26 PM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: draft-gellens-pop3ext-07.txt

Version -07 of the POP3 Extensions draft was just sent in; it should be
posted soon. If anyone wants it before then, let me know and I'll send
a copy by email.

Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 14:58:35 -0700
To: Chris Newman <[email-masked]>
From: Dave Crocker <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: mailrev BOF
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

At 12:05 PM 8/18/98 -0700, Chris Newman wrote:
>Thursday, August 27 at 0900-1130

Damn.  That's directly opposite the fax-over-email working group.  tsk. tsk.

>Timekeeper: volunteer needed who is willing to cut people off

at the knees?

d/ 

_________________________________________________________________________
Dave CROCKER                            <mailto:[email-masked]>

Tel: +1 408 246 8253     BRANDENBURG CONSULTING      Tel: +60 19 3299 445
675 Spruce Drive                                      P. O.  Box 296, UPM
Sunnyvale, CA 94086       www.brandenburg.com     Serdang, Selangor 43400
United States            Fax:  +1 408 273 6464                   Malaysia

Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1998 12:05:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: Chris Newman <[email-masked]>
Subject: mailrev BOF
To: [email-masked]
Originator-Info: login-id=chris; server=THOR.INNOSOFT.COM
Sender: [email-masked]

Here is a BOF which should interest participants on this mailing list.
The pop3 extensions proposal and POP3 SASL revision are on the agenda for
brief review and a sense of rough concensus.

----
Review of Short Mail-related Extension Proposals (mailrev)

Thursday, August 27 at 0900-1130
================================

Chair: Chris Newman <[email-masked]>
Timekeeper: volunteer needed who is willing to cut people off
Note Taker: volunteer needed

DESCRIPTION:

Thare are a number of short mail-related individual submissions which
appear not to require the review of a full working group, but would
benefit from some review and a sense of rough concensus.  Each draft
on the agenda will be allocated a fixed (and enforced) time limit for a
brief presentation and technical debate.  At the end of the time
limit, the rough concensus of the room will be measured to see if the
draft in question should go standards track expediously, standards
track with revisions, experimental, punt to WG, defer or discourage.

The success of this effort is likely to depend on the number of
participants who read the drafts in advance.  Most of these drafts are
short.  Draft authors are requested to prepare one overhead
transparency to summarize their proposals.  Some of the drafts listed
below could get IESG approval prior to the BOF, in which case they
will be dropped from the agenda.  The purpose of including drafts in
last call on the list is that if they're not approved by the time the
BOF occurs, then the BOF may give review feedback to ADs which could
help speed approval.

Gzip tar file of documents on agenda:
   <http://www.innosoft.com/iii/persons/chris/mailrev.tgz>

AGENDA:

      Time Limit   Presenter  Pages    Draft Title
intro     5   Chair
review    8   Gunnar Lindburg  21  draft-lindberg-anti-spam-mta-04.txt!
concensus 2   Chair
review   10   Randy Gellens    14  draft-gellens-submit-11.txt!
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   John Myers       6   draft-myers-sasl-pop3-05.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   Randy Gellens    17  draft-gellens-pop3ext-07.txt!
concensus 2   Chair
review    8   Jacob Palme      14? draft-ietf-mailext-new-fields-13.txt!
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   Chris Newman     6   draft-newman-msgheader-originfo-05.txt!
concensus 2   Chair
review    8   Jacob Palme      16? draft-ietf-drums-MHRegistry-03.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    8   Randy Gellens    8   draft-gellens-on-demand-05.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   Ned Freed        7   draft-freed-gatesec-02.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   L. Lundblade     4   draft-lundblade-1pass-mult-alt-01.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    8   Chris Newman     10  draft-newman-auth-resp-00.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   Ned Freed        10  draft-newman-deliver-00.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    3   Chris Newman     4   draft-newman-mime-cdisp-metadata-01.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   Ned Freed        11  draft-freed-bsmtp-01.txt
concensus 2   Chair
review    5   Randy Gellens    7   draft-gellens-format-00.txt
concensus 2   Chair
conclude  15  Chair    What's missing from mail standards that
                       IETF could do next?

! - document is in last call
? - document lacks page numbers, estimate included

Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1998 18:25:43 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Subject: draft-gellens-pop3ext-07.txt
Sender: [email-masked]

Version -07 of the POP3 Extensions draft was just sent in; it should be
posted soon. If anyone wants it before then, let me know and I'll send
a copy by email.