Subject: [Extra] Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-extra-quota-07: (with COMMENT)

From: Francesca Palombini via Datatracker <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2021 10:50:08 -0700

Francesca Palombini has entered the following ballot position for
draft-ietf-extra-quota-07: 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/blog/handling-iesg-ballot-positions/
for more information about how to handle DISCUSS and COMMENT positions.

The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here:
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-extra-quota/

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

Thank you for the work on this document.

Many thanks to Todd Herr for the ART ART review.

I only have two comments; although not worth a DISCUSS (because in the
examples), I'd really appreciate an answer.

Francesca

1. -----

      S: S0001 OK Rounded quota

FP: This is not defined - should it be "OK setquota completed" ?

2. -----

      C: S0003 STATUS INBOX (MESSAGES DELETED DELETED-STORAGE)

      S: * STATUS INBOX (MESSAGES 12 DELETED 4 DELETED-STORAGE 8)

FP: I think the above should be MESSAGE rather than MESSAGES.

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 12:04:45 +0100

Hi Francesca,

Thank you for your comments. My answers below.

Only the tag ("S0001" in this case) and "OK" are syntanctically required 
elements in IMAP. The rest is just human readable text. So omitting the 
command name from the human readable text is not an error.
> FP: I think the above should be MESSAGE rather than MESSAGES.

I just checked and STATUS "MESSAGES" is part of the base 
IMAP4rev1/IMAPrev2. See Section 6.3.11 of 
<https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc9051/>

Best Regards,

Alexey

---

From: Francesca Palombini <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2021 12:35:25 +0000

Hi Alexey! Thanks for your answers, I see. I guess I was just surprised that the text didn’t match what was mentioned just above, but if it is not required to then that’s not an issue. I did miss MESSAGES in 9051, thanks for pointing to the right section.

Francesca

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Thursday, 21 October 2021 at 13:04
To: Francesca Palombini <[email-masked]>, The IESG <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked] <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] <[email-masked]>, [email-masked] <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: [Extra] Francesca Palombini's No Objection on draft-ietf-extra-quota-07: (with COMMENT)
Hi Francesca,

Best Regards,

Alexey