Internet Message Access Protocol - ANNOTATE Extension
draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-16
Revision differences
Document history
Date | Rev. | By | Action |
---|---|---|---|
2012-08-22
|
16 | (System) | post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Brian Carpenter |
2007-06-20
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor |
2007-06-19
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress |
2007-06-19
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors |
2007-06-06
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress |
2007-05-20
|
16 | (System) | IANA Action state changed to In Progress |
2007-05-15
|
16 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza |
2007-05-14
|
16 | Amy Vezza | IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent |
2007-05-14
|
16 | Amy Vezza | IESG has approved the document |
2007-05-14
|
16 | Amy Vezza | Closed "Approve" ballot |
2007-05-02
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | Changed RFC Ed note to add missing IANA registration for capability. |
2007-05-02
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-11-17
|
16 | (System) | Removed from agenda for telechat - 2006-11-16 |
2006-11-16
|
16 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent::Point Raised - writeup needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza |
2006-11-16
|
16 | Amy Vezza | [Ballot Position Update] Position for Brian Carpenter has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Amy Vezza |
2006-11-16
|
16 | David Kessens | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by David Kessens |
2006-11-16
|
16 | Magnus Westerlund | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Ross Callon | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ross Callon |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Yoshiko Fong | IANA Comments: Upon approval of this document, the IANA will complete two actions. [1] Creation of a new registry to contain the annotation entries and … IANA Comments: Upon approval of this document, the IANA will complete two actions. [1] Creation of a new registry to contain the annotation entries and annotation attributes associated with the IMAP ANNOTATE Extension. Inside that registry will be two subregistries: [1.1] IANA will create a new subregistry for annotation entries. Entry names must be specified in a standards track or IESG approved experimental RFC, or fall under the vendor namespace. Each entry registration must include a content-type that is used to indicate the nature of the annotation value. The initial values in this new sub registry will be: Name: /comment Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: /flags Description: Reserved entry hierarchy. Content-Type: - Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: /altsubject Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: //comment Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: //flags/seen Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: //flags/answered Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: //flags/flagged Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: //flags/forwarded Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name [1.2] IANA will create a new registry for annotation attributes. Attribute names MUST be specified in a standards track or IESG approved experimental RFC.The initial values for this subregistry will be: Name: value Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name Name: size Description: Defined in IMAP ANNOTATE extension document. Contact person: Cyrus Daboo email: cyrus@daboo.name [2] The registration of attribute names and entry names is done using a template provided by section 7.1 of the approved document. IANA will include a copy of the template in the registry created in step [1] of these actions. IANA understands that these are the only actions required upon approval of this document. |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Ted Hardie | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ted Hardie |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Mark Townsley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Mark Townsley |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Jari Arkko | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot comment] From Gen-ART review by Robert Sparks. 1: Has there been any explicit discussion about what a future transition from experimental to PS would … [Ballot comment] From Gen-ART review by Robert Sparks. 1: Has there been any explicit discussion about what a future transition from experimental to PS would look like? If there is uptake of the extension using ANNOTATE-EXPERIMENT-1 and we later want to deploy this as ANNOTATE, its clear what the path is if everything worked, but if experience showed that some component or semantic needed to change in a non-backward compatible way, is it an expectation/requirement that mailboxes with EXPERIMENT-1 annotations be preservable? 2: The last sentence of section 4.5 speaks of "completely bypassing the base IMAP flag/keyword behavior". To me this implies that the client can forget the base mechanisms exist and ignore/not use them. I don't think that was the intent of the sentence (I'm guessing it means "instead of relying on the base behavior" or "instead of being limited to the base behavior"?) 3: Section 4.2.2 confused me on first read. I wonder if the second paragraph is vestigal and now out of place (the idea is captured more clearly in 4.3). A sentence noting that the definition blocks here are the attribute names defined in this draft would also help avoid the confusion I ran into. |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot comment] From Gen-ART review by Robert Sparks. 1: Has there been any explicit discussion about what a future transition from experimental to PS would … [Ballot comment] From Gen-ART review by Robert Sparks. 1: Has there been any explicit discussion about what a future transition from experimental to PS would look like? If there is uptake of the extension using ANNOTATE-EXPERIMENT-1 and we later want to deploy this as ANNOTATE, its clear what the path is if everything worked, but if experience showed that some component or semantic needed to change in a non-backward compatible way, is it an expectation/requirement that mailboxes with EXPERIMENT-1 annotations be preservable? 2: The last sentence of section 4.5 speaks of "completely bypassing the base IMAP flag/keyword behavior". To me this implies that the client can forget the base mechanisms exist and ignore/not use them. I don't think that was the intent of the sentence (I'm guessing it means "instead of relying on the base behavior" or "instead of being limited to the base behavior"?) 3: Section 4.2.2 confused me on first read. I wonder if the second paragraph is vestigal and now out of place (the idea is captured more clearly in 4.3). A sentence noting that the definition blocks here are the attribute names defined in this draft would also help avoid the confusion I ran into. |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot discuss] From Gen-ART review by Robert Sparks. Looking at this from IANA's point of view, it's not clear what the draft is asking them … [Ballot discuss] From Gen-ART review by Robert Sparks. Looking at this from IANA's point of view, it's not clear what the draft is asking them to do. If I read it correctly, it's asking for (at least one) new registry. If that's correct, there are more explicit instructions needed [to create the registry]. It would probably be helpful to reiterate the pointer to 2244 for the vendor name registry. And I'm curious whether this draft should register this capability in http://www.iana.org/assignments/imap4-capabilities? |
2006-11-15
|
16 | Brian Carpenter | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Brian Carpenter |
2006-11-14
|
16 | Dan Romascanu | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu |
2006-11-14
|
16 | Cullen Jennings | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings |
2006-11-13
|
16 | Russ Housley | [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Russ Housley |
2006-11-08
|
16 | (System) | Requested Telechat review by SECDIR |
2006-11-02
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Lisa Dusseault |
2006-11-02
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | Ballot has been issued by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-11-02
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | Created "Approve" ballot |
2006-11-02
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | Placed on agenda for telechat - 2006-11-16 by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-11-02
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::AD Followup by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-10-19
|
16 | (System) | Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed |
2006-10-19
|
16 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-16.txt |
2006-08-10
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | Note field has been cleared by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-08-10
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | State Changes to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::Revised ID Needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-08-10
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | State Change Notice email list have been change to <presnick@qualcomm.com>, cyrus@daboo.name from <presnick@qualcomm.com> |
2006-08-07
|
16 | (System) | State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system |
2006-07-31
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | [Note]: 'Next state will be Revised ID needed according to Cyrus.' added by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-07-24
|
16 | Amy Vezza | Last call sent |
2006-07-24
|
16 | Amy Vezza | State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza |
2006-07-24
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | Last Call was requested by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-07-24
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | State Changes to Last Call Requested from Publication Requested by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-07-24
|
16 | (System) | Ballot writeup text was added |
2006-07-24
|
16 | (System) | Last call text was added |
2006-07-24
|
16 | (System) | Ballot approval text was added |
2006-07-24
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | State Changes to Publication Requested from AD is watching by Lisa Dusseault |
2006-07-20
|
16 | Lisa Dusseault | Intended Status has been changed to Experimental from Proposed Standard |
2006-04-02
|
16 | Scott Hollenbeck | Shepherding AD has been changed to Lisa Dusseault from Scott Hollenbeck |
2006-03-29
|
15 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-15.txt |
2006-01-11
|
16 | Scott Hollenbeck | State Changes to AD is watching from Dead by Scott Hollenbeck |
2005-11-28
|
14 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-14.txt |
2005-11-07
|
16 | (System) | State Changes to Dead from AD is watching by system |
2005-11-07
|
16 | (System) | Document has expired |
2005-04-01
|
13 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-13.txt |
2005-02-03
|
12 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-12.txt |
2004-10-25
|
11 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-11.txt |
2004-07-20
|
10 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-10.txt |
2004-04-20
|
09 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-09.txt |
2004-03-10
|
16 | Scott Hollenbeck | Shepherding AD has been changed to Scott Hollenbeck from Ned Freed |
2003-10-21
|
08 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-08.txt |
2003-05-20
|
07 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-07.txt |
2003-03-06
|
06 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-06.txt |
2002-11-21
|
16 | Ned Freed | Draft Added by Freed, Ned |
2002-11-05
|
05 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-05.txt |
2002-03-06
|
04 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-04.txt |
2002-01-22
|
03 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-03.txt |
2001-11-30
|
02 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-02.txt |
2001-03-02
|
01 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-01.txt |
2000-07-18
|
00 | (System) | New version available: draft-ietf-imapext-annotate-00.txt |