Subject: Re: Proposed charter
From: Steve Hole <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:11:24 -0600

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:35:30 -0700 Mike Gahrns <[email-masked]> wrote:

> *** Well consensus seemed to have been reached on the list on this, and it
> has gone through the Last Call process with no further comments.  In
> speaking with Harald and Keith,  the IESG has approved this as an RFC,
> although the number has not come out yet.
> 
> Were you thinking of a particular problem with the draft?  If so, then we
> definitely should discuss, but from what I could tell, thinks were pretty
> much wrapped up...

I was happy with it.   At least to the point where we need some operational 
experience to base changes on.   I was probing to see if there were any last 
minute issues with it.    Just about all the discussion on this extension was
done on the list, and I'm not sure I always trust the results in such a case.

Cheers.
---  
Steve Hole                                
The Esys Corporation
Mailto:[email-masked]  
Phone:403-424-4922

To: [email-masked]
Path: not-for-mail
From: John Gardiner Myers <[email-masked]>
Newsgroups: mcom.list.ietf-imapext
Subject: Re: Proposed charter
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 13:48:39 -0700
Organization: Netscape Communications Corporation
Lines: 6
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.93.95.149
Sender: [email-masked]

Last I heard, UIDPLUS is in AD review prior to Last Call.  I sent in the
request during the last IETF.  Hopefully, Last Call will be issued soon.

I'll propose the following addition to the charter:

	Revising the base IMAP4rev1 spec is out of the scope of this WG.

Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 11:08:29 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Sender: [email-masked]

Cyrus' point is a good one. I've now made a list on
<http://www.imc.org/ietf-imapext/> of all the extensions I've seen RFCs or
drafts for. I fully admit there are probably others; please look over the
table and let me know what needs to be added or changed.

And, for those of you on Cyrus' list that don't have drafts for your
proposals: please write up an I-D! They're not that hard to put together,
and they let everyone have a chance to use your work.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

From: "Mike Gahrns (Exchange)" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Cyrus Daboo'" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 10:34:24 -0700
Sender: [email-masked]

Haschildren, should be Child Mailbox and authors are Gahrns and Cheng.  It
is draft-00, but I should have a version -01 out soon with the minor
comments that came in on the list.

Also Language Extension, authors Gahrns and McCown.  It is also version -00
and I once again I aim to get an update out soon.

you also missed rfc2088, non synchronizing literals, author Myers

thx

-----Original Message-----
From: Cyrus Daboo [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, April 10, 1998 10:19 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter

--On Thursday, April 09, 1998, 4:14 PM -0700 "Larry Osterman (Exchange)"
<[email-masked]> wrote: 

> My gut tells me that namespace is going to have to be merged as a part of
> the base spec, but others will probably differ.

I believe it should be made clear in the charter that the WG has absolutely
no intention to do any changes to the base spec. I presume that that is the
case and I think it needs to be emphasised.

Also, I think it would be a good idea to have posted to this list a complete
set of all extensions and their status so we at least have an overview of
what is currently being worked on or is complete. I'm not proposing that any
or all of these should be considered by the WG, just that it is useful to
see if there may be some overlap.

Perhaps someone should volunteer to collate extensions and post it to the
list. I'd be happy to do this, so if those working on extensions could email
me directly <mailto:[email-masked]> with brief details (title, authors,
description, status) I'll put the list together. Here's what I have already:

Name            Author(s)       Description                     Status
----            ---------       -----------                     ------
ACL             Myers           Access Control Lists            RFC2086
QUOTA           Myers           Quota controls/feedback         RFC2087
LITERAL+        Myers           non-synchronising               RFC2088
IDLE            Leiba           idle time polling               RFC2177
MAILBOX-REFERRALS Gahrns        distributed mailboxes           RFC2193
LOGIN-REFERRALS Gahrns          referrals to servers            RFC2221

UIDPLUS         Myers           Better disconnected support     Last Call?

NAMESPACE       Gahrns, Newman  mailbox namespaces              Draft

SORT            Crispin         Message sorting                 posted to
list
SCAN            Crispin         Multi-mailbox search?           ?
THREAD          Crispin         Threaded sorts?                 ?
HASCHILDREN?    Leiba           Extra LIST flag                 ?
ID              Showalter       Identification information      Draft
(expired)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cyrus Daboo                                 <mailto:[email-masked]>
Cyrusoft International, Inc.                  <http://www.cyrusoft.com>
Voice: +1 412 605 0499                             Fax: +1 412 605 0705
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     Proud Purveyors of Mulberry: Internet Mail from the Ground Up
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 13:18:43 -0400
From: "Cyrus Daboo" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Sender: [email-masked]

--On Thursday, April 09, 1998, 4:14 PM -0700 "Larry Osterman (Exchange)"
<[email-masked]> wrote: 

> My gut tells me that namespace is going to have to be merged as a part of
> the base spec, but others will probably differ.

I believe it should be made clear in the charter that the WG has absolutely
no intention to do any changes to the base spec. I presume that that is the
case and I think it needs to be emphasised.

Also, I think it would be a good idea to have posted to this list a complete
set of all extensions and their status so we at least have an overview of
what is currently being worked on or is complete. I'm not proposing that any
or all of these should be considered by the WG, just that it is useful to
see if there may be some overlap.

Perhaps someone should volunteer to collate extensions and post it to the
list. I'd be happy to do this, so if those working on extensions could email
me directly <mailto:[email-masked]> with brief details (title, authors,
description, status) I'll put the list together. Here's what I have already:

Name            Author(s)       Description                     Status
----            ---------       -----------                     ------
ACL             Myers           Access Control Lists            RFC2086
QUOTA           Myers           Quota controls/feedback         RFC2087
LITERAL+        Myers           non-synchronising               RFC2088
IDLE            Leiba           idle time polling               RFC2177
MAILBOX-REFERRALS Gahrns        distributed mailboxes           RFC2193
LOGIN-REFERRALS Gahrns          referrals to servers            RFC2221

UIDPLUS         Myers           Better disconnected support     Last Call?

NAMESPACE       Gahrns, Newman  mailbox namespaces              Draft

SORT            Crispin         Message sorting                 posted to
list
SCAN            Crispin         Multi-mailbox search?           ?
THREAD          Crispin         Threaded sorts?                 ?
HASCHILDREN?    Leiba           Extra LIST flag                 ?
ID              Showalter       Identification information      Draft
(expired)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cyrus Daboo                                 <mailto:[email-masked]>
Cyrusoft International, Inc.                  <http://www.cyrusoft.com>
Voice: +1 412 605 0499                             Fax: +1 412 605 0705
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     Proud Purveyors of Mulberry: Internet Mail from the Ground Up
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From: "Mike Gahrns" <[email-masked]>
To: "Steve Hole" <[email-masked]>, "John Myers" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:35:30 -0700
Sender: [email-masked]

Steve Hole writes:
>I am not sure what context the namespace extension was discussed in -- as
in
>we are happy enough with it just to continue or we don't believe it to be
>important enough to include in the list of extensions to work on in the
>working group.
>
>I think that it is important enough to include in the work unless we are
>completely happy with it so far.
*** Well consensus seemed to have been reached on the list on this, and it
has gone through the Last Call process with no further comments.  In
speaking with Harald and Keith,  the IESG has approved this as an RFC,
although the number has not come out yet.

Were you thinking of a particular problem with the draft?  If so, then we
definitely should discuss, but from what I could tell, thinks were pretty
much wrapped up...

From: "Larry Osterman (Exchange)" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Steve Hole'" <[email-masked]>, John Myers <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:14:26 -0700 
Sender: [email-masked]

My gut tells me that namespace is going to have to be merged as a part of
the base spec, but others will probably differ.

Larry Osterman
Sent from larryo-laptop.dns.microsoft.com running NT5 and Outlook 98 and
Exchange Server 5.5.  Please notify the sender of any difficulties

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Hole [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 1998 4:07 PM
To: John Myers
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Proposed charter

On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:49:30 -0700 John Myers <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Description of Working Group:
> 
> The IETF IMAP extensions Working Group shall revise and publish
> standards-track extensions to IMAP4 for performing the following
> functions:
> 
> 1) Access Control Lists
> 2) Sorting
> 3) Threading
> 4) Message-level annotations

I am not sure what context the namespace extension was discussed in -- as in

we are happy enough with it just to continue or we don't believe it to be 
important enough to include in the list of extensions to work on in the 
working group.

I think that it is important enough to include in the work unless we are 
completely happy with it so far.

Cheers.
---  
Steve Hole                                
The Esys Corporation
Mailto:[email-masked]  
Phone:403-424-4922

From: Steve Hole <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 17:07:26 -0600
To: John Myers <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:49:30 -0700 John Myers <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Description of Working Group:
> 
> The IETF IMAP extensions Working Group shall revise and publish
> standards-track extensions to IMAP4 for performing the following
> functions:
> 
> 1) Access Control Lists
> 2) Sorting
> 3) Threading
> 4) Message-level annotations

I am not sure what context the namespace extension was discussed in -- as in 
we are happy enough with it just to continue or we don't believe it to be 
important enough to include in the list of extensions to work on in the 
working group.

I think that it is important enough to include in the work unless we are 
completely happy with it so far.

Cheers.
---  
Steve Hole                                
The Esys Corporation
Mailto:[email-masked]  
Phone:403-424-4922

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:49:30 -0700
From: [email-masked] (John Myers)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Proposed charter
Sender: [email-masked]

I would like to start discussion with the following charter:

Chair(s):

TBD

Mailing Lists:

General discussion: [email-masked]
To Subscribe: [email-masked]
Archive: http://www.imc.org/ietf-imapext/

Description of Working Group:

The IETF IMAP extensions Working Group shall revise and publish
standards-track extensions to IMAP4 for performing the following
functions:

1) Access Control Lists
2) Sorting
3) Threading
4) Message-level annotations

Goals and Milestones:

August 98       Approve charter

Dec 98          Submit revised ACL spec to IESG

Mar 99          Submit revised Sorting/Threading spec(s) to IESG

August 99       Submit annotation spec to IESG

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:48:02 -0700
From: [email-masked] (John Myers)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: FROM THE CHAIR: Introduction to ietf-imapext
Sender: [email-masked]

The [email-masked] mailing list is now accepting submissions.

I will be the chair of the imapext BOF at the August 98 IETF.  Since I
will probably be a document editor for the imapext WG (should it form),
the chair of the WG will likely be someone else.

Messages I send to the list in the role of BOF chair will have the
prefix "FROM THE CHAIR" in the Subject:.  All other messages I send to
the list are in my role as individual contributor.

The first task of this mailing list is to discuss the need and scope of
a possible imapext Working Group and to propose a charter for such a
group.  At this time, discussion of proposed IMAP extensions is only
appropriate insofar as it is relevant to defining the need, scope, and
charter of this proposed Working Group.  Detailed debate about any
contentious issues in proposed extensions is inappropriate at this
time--it will become appropriate only after we have rough consensus on a
charter.

From: Steve Hole <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1998 09:11:24 -0600
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Proposed charter
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:35:30 -0700 Mike Gahrns <[email-masked]> wrote:

> *** Well consensus seemed to have been reached on the list on this, and it
> has gone through the Last Call process with no further comments.  In
> speaking with Harald and Keith,  the IESG has approved this as an RFC,
> although the number has not come out yet.
> 
> Were you thinking of a particular problem with the draft?  If so, then we
> definitely should discuss, but from what I could tell, thinks were pretty
> much wrapped up...

I was happy with it.   At least to the point where we need some operational 
experience to base changes on.   I was probing to see if there were any last 
minute issues with it.    Just about all the discussion on this extension was
done on the list, and I'm not sure I always trust the results in such a case.

Cheers.
---  
Steve Hole                                
The Esys Corporation
Mailto:[email-masked]  
Phone:403-424-4922

To: [email-masked]
Path: not-for-mail
From: John Gardiner Myers <[email-masked]>
Newsgroups: mcom.list.ietf-imapext
Subject: Re: Proposed charter
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 13:48:39 -0700
Organization: Netscape Communications Corporation
Lines: 6
NNTP-Posting-Host: 198.93.95.149
Sender: [email-masked]

Last I heard, UIDPLUS is in AD review prior to Last Call.  I sent in the
request during the last IETF.  Hopefully, Last Call will be issued soon.

I'll propose the following addition to the charter:

	Revising the base IMAP4rev1 spec is out of the scope of this WG.

Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 11:08:29 -0700
To: [email-masked]
From: Paul Hoffman / IMC <[email-masked]>
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Sender: [email-masked]

Cyrus' point is a good one. I've now made a list on
<http://www.imc.org/ietf-imapext/> of all the extensions I've seen RFCs or
drafts for. I fully admit there are probably others; please look over the
table and let me know what needs to be added or changed.

And, for those of you on Cyrus' list that don't have drafts for your
proposals: please write up an I-D! They're not that hard to put together,
and they let everyone have a chance to use your work.

--Paul Hoffman, Director
--Internet Mail Consortium

From: "Mike Gahrns (Exchange)" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Cyrus Daboo'" <[email-masked]>, [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 10:34:24 -0700
Sender: [email-masked]

Haschildren, should be Child Mailbox and authors are Gahrns and Cheng.  It
is draft-00, but I should have a version -01 out soon with the minor
comments that came in on the list.

Also Language Extension, authors Gahrns and McCown.  It is also version -00
and I once again I aim to get an update out soon.

you also missed rfc2088, non synchronizing literals, author Myers

thx

-----Original Message-----
From: Cyrus Daboo [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Friday, April 10, 1998 10:19 AM
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter

--On Thursday, April 09, 1998, 4:14 PM -0700 "Larry Osterman (Exchange)"
<[email-masked]> wrote: 

> My gut tells me that namespace is going to have to be merged as a part of
> the base spec, but others will probably differ.

I believe it should be made clear in the charter that the WG has absolutely
no intention to do any changes to the base spec. I presume that that is the
case and I think it needs to be emphasised.

Also, I think it would be a good idea to have posted to this list a complete
set of all extensions and their status so we at least have an overview of
what is currently being worked on or is complete. I'm not proposing that any
or all of these should be considered by the WG, just that it is useful to
see if there may be some overlap.

Perhaps someone should volunteer to collate extensions and post it to the
list. I'd be happy to do this, so if those working on extensions could email
me directly <mailto:[email-masked]> with brief details (title, authors,
description, status) I'll put the list together. Here's what I have already:

Name            Author(s)       Description                     Status
----            ---------       -----------                     ------
ACL             Myers           Access Control Lists            RFC2086
QUOTA           Myers           Quota controls/feedback         RFC2087
LITERAL+        Myers           non-synchronising               RFC2088
IDLE            Leiba           idle time polling               RFC2177
MAILBOX-REFERRALS Gahrns        distributed mailboxes           RFC2193
LOGIN-REFERRALS Gahrns          referrals to servers            RFC2221

UIDPLUS         Myers           Better disconnected support     Last Call?

NAMESPACE       Gahrns, Newman  mailbox namespaces              Draft

SORT            Crispin         Message sorting                 posted to
list
SCAN            Crispin         Multi-mailbox search?           ?
THREAD          Crispin         Threaded sorts?                 ?
HASCHILDREN?    Leiba           Extra LIST flag                 ?
ID              Showalter       Identification information      Draft
(expired)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cyrus Daboo                                 <mailto:[email-masked]>
Cyrusoft International, Inc.                  <http://www.cyrusoft.com>
Voice: +1 412 605 0499                             Fax: +1 412 605 0705
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     Proud Purveyors of Mulberry: Internet Mail from the Ground Up
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1998 13:18:43 -0400
From: "Cyrus Daboo" <[email-masked]>
To: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Sender: [email-masked]

--On Thursday, April 09, 1998, 4:14 PM -0700 "Larry Osterman (Exchange)"
<[email-masked]> wrote: 

> My gut tells me that namespace is going to have to be merged as a part of
> the base spec, but others will probably differ.

I believe it should be made clear in the charter that the WG has absolutely
no intention to do any changes to the base spec. I presume that that is the
case and I think it needs to be emphasised.

Also, I think it would be a good idea to have posted to this list a complete
set of all extensions and their status so we at least have an overview of
what is currently being worked on or is complete. I'm not proposing that any
or all of these should be considered by the WG, just that it is useful to
see if there may be some overlap.

Perhaps someone should volunteer to collate extensions and post it to the
list. I'd be happy to do this, so if those working on extensions could email
me directly <mailto:[email-masked]> with brief details (title, authors,
description, status) I'll put the list together. Here's what I have already:

Name            Author(s)       Description                     Status
----            ---------       -----------                     ------
ACL             Myers           Access Control Lists            RFC2086
QUOTA           Myers           Quota controls/feedback         RFC2087
LITERAL+        Myers           non-synchronising               RFC2088
IDLE            Leiba           idle time polling               RFC2177
MAILBOX-REFERRALS Gahrns        distributed mailboxes           RFC2193
LOGIN-REFERRALS Gahrns          referrals to servers            RFC2221

UIDPLUS         Myers           Better disconnected support     Last Call?

NAMESPACE       Gahrns, Newman  mailbox namespaces              Draft

SORT            Crispin         Message sorting                 posted to
list
SCAN            Crispin         Multi-mailbox search?           ?
THREAD          Crispin         Threaded sorts?                 ?
HASCHILDREN?    Leiba           Extra LIST flag                 ?
ID              Showalter       Identification information      Draft
(expired)

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Cyrus Daboo                                 <mailto:[email-masked]>
Cyrusoft International, Inc.                  <http://www.cyrusoft.com>
Voice: +1 412 605 0499                             Fax: +1 412 605 0705
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
     Proud Purveyors of Mulberry: Internet Mail from the Ground Up
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

From: "Mike Gahrns" <[email-masked]>
To: "Steve Hole" <[email-masked]>, "John Myers" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:35:30 -0700
Sender: [email-masked]

Steve Hole writes:
>I am not sure what context the namespace extension was discussed in -- as
in
>we are happy enough with it just to continue or we don't believe it to be
>important enough to include in the list of extensions to work on in the
>working group.
>
>I think that it is important enough to include in the work unless we are
>completely happy with it so far.
*** Well consensus seemed to have been reached on the list on this, and it
has gone through the Last Call process with no further comments.  In
speaking with Harald and Keith,  the IESG has approved this as an RFC,
although the number has not come out yet.

Were you thinking of a particular problem with the draft?  If so, then we
definitely should discuss, but from what I could tell, thinks were pretty
much wrapped up...

From: "Larry Osterman (Exchange)" <[email-masked]>
To: "'Steve Hole'" <[email-masked]>, John Myers <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: RE: Proposed charter
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 16:14:26 -0700 
Sender: [email-masked]

My gut tells me that namespace is going to have to be merged as a part of
the base spec, but others will probably differ.

Larry Osterman
Sent from larryo-laptop.dns.microsoft.com running NT5 and Outlook 98 and
Exchange Server 5.5.  Please notify the sender of any difficulties

-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Hole [mailto:[email-masked]]
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 1998 4:07 PM
To: John Myers
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Proposed charter

On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:49:30 -0700 John Myers <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Description of Working Group:
> 
> The IETF IMAP extensions Working Group shall revise and publish
> standards-track extensions to IMAP4 for performing the following
> functions:
> 
> 1) Access Control Lists
> 2) Sorting
> 3) Threading
> 4) Message-level annotations

I am not sure what context the namespace extension was discussed in -- as in

we are happy enough with it just to continue or we don't believe it to be 
important enough to include in the list of extensions to work on in the 
working group.

I think that it is important enough to include in the work unless we are 
completely happy with it so far.

Cheers.
---  
Steve Hole                                
The Esys Corporation
Mailto:[email-masked]  
Phone:403-424-4922

From: Steve Hole <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 9 Apr 1998 17:07:26 -0600
To: John Myers <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: Proposed charter
Cc: [email-masked]
Sender: [email-masked]

On Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:49:30 -0700 John Myers <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Description of Working Group:
> 
> The IETF IMAP extensions Working Group shall revise and publish
> standards-track extensions to IMAP4 for performing the following
> functions:
> 
> 1) Access Control Lists
> 2) Sorting
> 3) Threading
> 4) Message-level annotations

I am not sure what context the namespace extension was discussed in -- as in 
we are happy enough with it just to continue or we don't believe it to be 
important enough to include in the list of extensions to work on in the 
working group.

I think that it is important enough to include in the work unless we are 
completely happy with it so far.

Cheers.
---  
Steve Hole                                
The Esys Corporation
Mailto:[email-masked]  
Phone:403-424-4922

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:49:30 -0700
From: [email-masked] (John Myers)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Proposed charter
Sender: [email-masked]

I would like to start discussion with the following charter:

Chair(s):

TBD

Mailing Lists:

General discussion: [email-masked]
To Subscribe: [email-masked]
Archive: http://www.imc.org/ietf-imapext/

Description of Working Group:

The IETF IMAP extensions Working Group shall revise and publish
standards-track extensions to IMAP4 for performing the following
functions:

1) Access Control Lists
2) Sorting
3) Threading
4) Message-level annotations

Goals and Milestones:

August 98       Approve charter

Dec 98          Submit revised ACL spec to IESG

Mar 99          Submit revised Sorting/Threading spec(s) to IESG

August 99       Submit annotation spec to IESG

Date: Thu, 09 Apr 1998 10:48:02 -0700
From: [email-masked] (John Myers)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: FROM THE CHAIR: Introduction to ietf-imapext
Sender: [email-masked]

The [email-masked] mailing list is now accepting submissions.

I will be the chair of the imapext BOF at the August 98 IETF.  Since I
will probably be a document editor for the imapext WG (should it form),
the chair of the WG will likely be someone else.

Messages I send to the list in the role of BOF chair will have the
prefix "FROM THE CHAIR" in the Subject:.  All other messages I send to
the list are in my role as individual contributor.

The first task of this mailing list is to discuss the need and scope of
a possible imapext Working Group and to propose a charter for such a
group.  At this time, discussion of proposed IMAP extensions is only
appropriate insofar as it is relevant to defining the need, scope, and
charter of this proposed Working Group.  Detailed debate about any
contentious issues in proposed extensions is inappropriate at this
time--it will become appropriate only after we have rough consensus on a
charter.