> I discovered that the MULTIAPPEND draft had expired while waiting for IESG
> action. I've resubmitted it.
Grr. This is not supposed to happen. Documents which are "in the system", and
this one most certainly is, are not supposed to get deleted in this way.
I'll complain and see what's up.
Since you're resubmitting, nows as good a time as any to pass one the small
amount of feedback the IESG had on the document. (I was sitting on this
pending completion of the IMAP base document, since some of its arguably
interacts with that document, most especially the revised security stuff.)
The first issue is that this document uses MUST/SHOULD/MAY but doesn't define
them. All that's needed, of course, is the same sort of conventions information
you have in the imapv document:
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to
be interpreted as described in [KEYWORDS].
The second issue is that the IESG isn't happy with the security considerations
section. While it is true that this document doesn't deal with security per se,
it may nevertheless have security issues. I think what is needed here is
something to the effect that MULTIAPPEND doesn't raise any security
considerations that aren't present in the base IMAP protocol and those issues
are covered in the imapv document. I suppose it wouldn't hurt to also reiterate
the fact that email messages travel over the network in the clear unless some
sort of security layer is negotiated, but I don't insist on that.
The third, very minor, issue is that the references need to be separated
into normative and informative.
That's it!
Ned
