Subject: [Extra] Suresh Krishnan's No Objection on draft-ietf-extra-imap-status-size-02: (with COMMENT)

From: Suresh Krishnan <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 22:49:25 -0700

Suresh Krishnan has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-extra-imap-status-size-02: 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 https://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:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-extra-imap-status-size/

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

I am fine with the range being limited to the positive half of the signed 64
bit integer range, but I am not at all sure why this makes implementation any
easier. Can you clarify?

   The message size is chosen to be at most 63 bits wide rather than 64
   bits to make implementations on various platforms (such as Java)
   easier.

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 06 Jun 2018 16:32:18 +0100

Hi Suresh,

>    bits to make implementations on various platforms (such as Java)

There are some client and server IMAP implementations in Java. Java doesn't have native unsigned 64 bit type, but it has signed 64 bit type, which can be used to store an unsigned 63-bit value.

Best Regards,
Alexey