JSON Meta Application Protocol (JMAP) Blob Management Extension
draft-ietf-jmap-blob-18

# Internet AD comments for draft-ietf-jmap-blob-17
CC @ekline

## Nits

### Abstract

* "on defined endpoint"

  Perhaps "on defined endpoints" or "on a defined endpoint" or something.

### S3.1

* s/Alogirthms/Algorithms/

Thank you for the work on this document.

Many thanks to Jaime Jimenez for his ART ART review: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/art/a-glx5aRVBz18NSuF61am4K5LPA/. I encourage the authors to take a look at Jaime's comments before proceeding with publication.

Thank you to Shawn Emery for the SECDIR review.

Thank you for addressing my DISCUSS and COMMENT feedback.

# GEN AD review of draft-ietf-jmap-blob-17

CC @larseggert

Thanks to Meral Shirazipour for the General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) review
(https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/BBWGL0wBOFVT7fFCVt0_eNpZQUw).

## Nits

All comments below are about very minor potential issues that you may choose to
address in some way - or ignore - as you see fit. Some were flagged by
automated tools (via https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool), so there
will likely be some false positives. There is no need to let me know what you
did with these suggestions.

### Typos

#### Section 3.1, paragraph 14
```
-       list MUST be present in the HTTP Digest Alogirthms registry
-                                                  ^ -
+       list MUST be present in the HTTP Digest Algorithms registry
+                                                 + ^
```

#### Section 4, paragraph 2
```
-    unchanged by this specfication, and is selected by the
+    unchanged by this specification, and is selected by the
+                          +
```

#### Section 4.1, paragraph 17
```
-    For each sucessful upload, servers MUST add an entry to the
+    For each successful upload, servers MUST add an entry to the
+               +
```

### Grammar/style

#### Section 4.2.2, paragraph 12
```
data given to a Blob/upload is a well formed instance of the specified media
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^^
```
This word is normally spelled with a hyphen.

#### Section 4.2.2, paragraph 12
```
e far side of security scanners (anti-virus or exfiltration scanners for exa
                                 ^^^^^^^^^^
```
This word is normally spelled as one.

## Notes

This review is in the ["IETF Comments" Markdown format][ICMF], You can use the
[`ietf-comments` tool][ICT] to automatically convert this review into
individual GitHub issues. Review generated by the [`ietf-reviewtool`][IRT].

[ICMF]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments/blob/main/format.md
[ICT]: https://github.com/mnot/ietf-comments
[IRT]: https://github.com/larseggert/ietf-reviewtool

Hi,

Thanks for this document.

At the moment there is a IAB workshop on possibly ways that the Internet could be made more energy efficient.  One of the observation is of using text based encodings (e.g., JSON), where binary encodings could be used instead (e.g., CBOR).  Specifically, email came up as example of something where a binary encoding could be helpful.  E.g., in this document, the need to encode the binary blob data in Base64 probably makes it around a third less efficient than just being able to embed the binary data directly.

Hence, a long term question (and not directly relevant to this document) is whether there has been any consideration for JMAP to support a binary encoding like CBOR?

Then I also have one specific minor comment on this document:  The introduction states that this mechanism should be used for small blobs.  Would it helpful to add guidance or a suggestion as to how big a small blob may be?

Regards,
Rob