Subject: [apps-discuss] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on draft-ietf-appsawg-multimailbox-search-03: (with COMMENT)

From: "Spencer Dawkins" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 13:34:27 -0700

Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-appsawg-multimailbox-search-03: No Objection

When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all
email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this
introductory paragraph, however.)

Please refer to http://www.ietf.org/iesg/statement/discuss-criteria.html
for more information about IESG DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-multimailbox-search/

----------------------------------------------------------------------
COMMENT:
----------------------------------------------------------------------

One question, at most a nit.

 In the Abstract

   This
   extension also uses MAILBOX and TAG fields in ESEARCH responses,
                       ^^^^^^^     ^^^
   allowing a client to pipeline the searches if it chooses.  This
   document updates RFC 4466 and obsoletes RFC 6237.

but in 1.  Introduction

   o  The MAILBOX, UIDVALIDITY, and TAG fields in the responses allow a
          ^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^^^^^^      ^^^
      client to distinguish which responses go with which search (and
      which mailbox).  A client can safely pipeline these search
      commands without danger of confusion.  The addition of the MAILBOX
      and UIDVALIDITY fields updates the search-correlator item defined
      in [RFC4466].

I'm only pattern matching, but should these lists of fields match? 

Or am I not understanding (which is likely)?

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 17:32:52 -0400

>    extension also uses MAILBOX and TAG fields in ESEARCH responses,

I think it really doesn't matter.  But there's no harm, and some
consistency, in having "UIDVALIDITY" in the abstract as well, so I'll
add it.

Barry