Re: Last Call: draft-ietf-imapext-sort (INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - SORT AND THREAD EXTENSIONS) to Proposed Standard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Hi Mark,

--On February 27, 2008 10:26:44 AM -0800 Mark Crispin <mrc@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> 
wrote:

> The proposed changes in the comments below create significiant
> incompatibilities with multiple interoperable client and server
> implementations that have been in production use and widely distributed
> worldwide for several years.
>
> The result of making any of these changes would be instability and
> inconsistency between implementations, creating an environment in which
> nobody can use these extensions because there is no reliable behavior.
>
> This document and its protocol are not new.  Both have been around for
> many years, and their publication was delayed unreasonably, due to (what
> is now generally recognized to have been) a false belief that
> internationalization had to be solved first.
>
> Any of these changes would add further multi-year delay to this protocol
> and specification.  Some of these involve considerable complexity which
> will require long discussion to hammer down.
>
> I recommend that these issues be punted to future work in new standards.

+1 - as written both SORT and THREAD can be easily extended with new 
behaviors as needed.

The current document describes what has been deployed to date. Whilst there 
has been much chatter in the past about defining new e.g. thread methods, 
nothing has come from any of that. So either people are happy with what is 
there now, or no one really cares that much about either of these because 
most clients in use do offline sort/thread anyhow.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

_______________________________________________
IETF mailing list
IETF@xxxxxxxx
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf

[Index of Archives]     [IETF Annoucements]     [IETF]     [IP Storage]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux SCTP]     [Linux Newbies]     [Fedora Users]