draft-ietf-appsawg-multimailbox-search-00.txt   draft-ietf-appsawg-multimailbox-search-01.txt 
Applications Area Working Group B. Leiba Applications Area Working Group B. Leiba
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies
Updates: 4466 (if approved) A. Melnikov Obsoletes: 6237 (if approved) A. Melnikov
Obsoletes: 6237 (if approved) Isode Limited Updates: 4466 (if approved) Isode Limited
Intended status: Standards Track March 03, 2014 Intended status: Standards Track June 3, 2014
Expires: September 02, 2014 Expires: December 5, 2014
IMAP4 Multimailbox SEARCH Extension IMAP4 Multimailbox SEARCH Extension
draft-ietf-appsawg-multimailbox-search-00 draft-ietf-appsawg-multimailbox-search-01
Abstract Abstract
The IMAP4 specification allows the searching of only the selected The IMAP4 specification allows the searching of only the selected
mailbox. A user often wants to search multiple mailboxes, and a mailbox. A user often wants to search multiple mailboxes, and a
client that wishes to support this must issue a series of SELECT and client that wishes to support this must issue a series of SELECT and
SEARCH commands, waiting for each to complete before moving on to the SEARCH commands, waiting for each to complete before moving on to the
next. This extension allows a client to search multiple mailboxes next. This extension allows a client to search multiple mailboxes
with one command, limiting round trips delay, and not requiring with one command, limiting round trips delay, and not requiring
disruption of the currently selected mailbox. This extension also disruption of the currently selected mailbox. This extension also
uses MAILBOX and TAG fields in ESEARCH responses, allowing a client uses MAILBOX and TAG fields in ESEARCH responses, allowing a client
to pipeline the searches if it chooses. This document updates RFC to pipeline the searches if it chooses. This document updates RFC
4466 and obsoletes RFC 6237. 4466 and obsoletes RFC 6237.
Status of this Memo Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 02, 2014. This Internet-Draft will expire on December 5, 2014.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2014 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved. document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/ Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. (http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights publication of this document. Please review these documents
and restrictions with respect to this document. Code Components carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
extracted from this document must include Simplified BSD License text to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
Table of Contents Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. New ESEARCH Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 2. New ESEARCH Command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.1. The ESEARCH Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2.1. The ESEARCH Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.2. Source Options: Specifying Mailboxes to Search . . . . . . . 5 2.2. Source Options: Specifying Mailboxes to Search . . . . . . 5
2.3. Strictness in Search Matches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 2.3. Strictness in Search Matches . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 3. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 4. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 7. Implementation Status . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 8. Changes Since RFC 6237 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
10.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The IMAP4 specification allows the searching of only the selected The IMAP4 specification allows the searching of only the selected
mailbox. A user often wants to search multiple mailboxes, and a mailbox. A user often wants to search multiple mailboxes, and a
client that wishes to support this must issue a series of SELECT and client that wishes to support this must issue a series of SELECT and
SEARCH commands, waiting for each to complete before moving on to the SEARCH commands, waiting for each to complete before moving on to the
next. The commands can't be pipelined, because the server might run next. The commands can't be pipelined, because the server might run
them in parallel, and the untagged SEARCH responses could not then be them in parallel, and the untagged SEARCH responses could not then be
distinguished from each other. distinguished from each other.
skipping to change at page 3, line 16 skipping to change at page 3, line 23
client to distinguish which responses go with which search (and client to distinguish which responses go with which search (and
which mailbox). A client can safely pipeline these search which mailbox). A client can safely pipeline these search
commands without danger of confusion. The addition of the MAILBOX commands without danger of confusion. The addition of the MAILBOX
and UIDVALIDITY fields updates the search-correlator item defined and UIDVALIDITY fields updates the search-correlator item defined
in [RFC4466]. in [RFC4466].
This extension was previously published as experimental. There is This extension was previously published as experimental. There is
now implementation experience, giving confidence in the protocol, so now implementation experience, giving confidence in the protocol, so
this document puts the extension on the Standards Track, with some this document puts the extension on the Standards Track, with some
minor updates that were informed by the implementation experience. minor updates that were informed by the implementation experience.
[[CREF1: RFC Editor: Please remove this paragraph at publication.]]
1.1. Conventions Used in This Document 1.1. Conventions Used in This Document
In examples, "C:" indicates lines sent by a client that is connected In examples, "C:" indicates lines sent by a client that is connected
to a server. "S:" indicates lines sent by the server to the client. to a server. "S:" indicates lines sent by the server to the client.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119]. document are to be interpreted as described in RFC 2119 [RFC2119].
skipping to change at page 3, line 51 skipping to change at page 4, line 12
(initially described in Section 6.4.4 of [RFC3501] and extended by (initially described in Section 6.4.4 of [RFC3501] and extended by
[RFC4731]). [RFC4731]).
The ESEARCH command further extends searching by allowing for The ESEARCH command further extends searching by allowing for
optional source and result options. This document does not define optional source and result options. This document does not define
any new result options (see Section 3.1 of [RFC4731]). A server that any new result options (see Section 3.1 of [RFC4731]). A server that
supports this extension includes "MULTISEARCH" in its IMAP capability supports this extension includes "MULTISEARCH" in its IMAP capability
string. string.
Because there has been confusion about this, it is worth pointing out Because there has been confusion about this, it is worth pointing out
that with ESEARCH, as with *any* SEARCH or UID SEARCH command, it that with ESEARCH, as with any SEARCH or UID SEARCH command, it MUST
MUST NOT be considered an error if the search terms include a range NOT be considered an error if the search terms include a range of
of message numbers that extends (or, in fact, starts) beyond the end message numbers that extends (or, in fact, starts) beyond the end of
of the mailbox. For example, a client might want to establish a the mailbox. For example, a client might want to establish a rolling
rolling window through the search results this way: window through the search results this way:
C: tag1 UID ESEARCH FROM "frobozz" 1:100 C: tag1 UID ESEARCH FROM "frobozz" 1:100
...followed later by this: ...followed later by this:
C: tag1 UID ESEARCH FROM "frobozz" 101:200 C: tag1 UID ESEARCH FROM "frobozz" 101:200
...and so on. This tells the server to match only the first hundred ...and so on. This tells the server to match only the first hundred
messages in the mailbox the first time, the second hundred the second messages in the mailbox the first time, the second hundred the second
time, etc. In fact, it might likely allow the server to optimize the time, etc. In fact, it might likely allow the server to optimize the
search significantly. In the above example, whether the mailbox search significantly. In the above example, whether the mailbox
contains 50 or 150 or 250 messages, neither of the search commands contains 50 or 150 or 250 messages, neither of the search commands
shown will result in an error. It is up to the client to know when shown will result in an error. It is up to the client to know when
skipping to change at page 4, line 39 skipping to change at page 5, line 6
Source options describe which mailboxes must be searched for Source options describe which mailboxes must be searched for
messages. An ESEARCH command with source options does not affect messages. An ESEARCH command with source options does not affect
which mailbox, if any, is currently selected, regardless of which which mailbox, if any, is currently selected, regardless of which
mailboxes are searched. mailboxes are searched.
For each mailbox satisfying the source options, a single ESEARCH For each mailbox satisfying the source options, a single ESEARCH
response MUST be returned if any messages in that mailbox match the response MUST be returned if any messages in that mailbox match the
search criteria. An ESEARCH response MUST NOT be returned for search criteria. An ESEARCH response MUST NOT be returned for
mailboxes that contain no matching messages. This is true even when mailboxes that contain no matching messages. This is true even when
result options such as MIN, MAX, and COUNT are specified (see Section result options such as MIN, MAX, and COUNT are specified (see
3.1 of [RFC4731]), and the values returned (lowest UID matched, Section 3.1 of [RFC4731]), and the values returned (lowest UID
highest UID matched, and number of messages matched, respectively) matched, highest UID matched, and number of messages matched,
apply to the mailbox reported in that ESEARCH response. respectively) apply to the mailbox reported in that ESEARCH response.
Note that it is possible for an ESEARCH command to return *no* Note that it is possible for an ESEARCH command to return no untagged
untagged responses (no ESEARCH responses at all), in the case that responses (no ESEARCH responses at all), in the case that there are
there are no matches to the search in any of the mailboxes that no matches to the search in any of the mailboxes that satisfy the
satisfy the source options. Clients can detect this situation by source options. Clients can detect this situation by finding the
finding the tagged OK response without having received any matching tagged OK response without having received any matching untagged
untagged ESEARCH responses. ESEARCH responses.
Each ESEARCH response MUST contain the MAILBOX, TAG, and UIDVALIDITY Each ESEARCH response MUST contain the MAILBOX, TAG, and UIDVALIDITY
correlators. Correlators allow clients to issue several ESEARCH correlators. Correlators allow clients to issue several ESEARCH
commands at once (pipelined). If the SEARCHRES [RFC5182] extension commands at once (pipelined). If the SEARCHRES [RFC5182] extension
is used in an ESEARCH command, that ESEARCH command MUST be executed is used in an ESEARCH command, that ESEARCH command MUST be executed
by the server after all previous SEARCH/ESEARCH commands have by the server after all previous SEARCH/ESEARCH commands have
completed and before any subsequent SEARCH/ESEARCH commands are completed and before any subsequent SEARCH/ESEARCH commands are
executed. The server MAY perform consecutive ESEARCH commands in executed. The server MAY perform consecutive ESEARCH commands in
parallel as long as none of them use the SEARCHRES extension. parallel as long as none of them use the SEARCHRES extension.
skipping to change at page 6, line 6 skipping to change at page 6, line 22
other mailboxes and NOT "selected", then the IMAP session MUST be in other mailboxes and NOT "selected", then the IMAP session MUST be in
either "selected" or "authenticated" state. If the session is not in either "selected" or "authenticated" state. If the session is not in
a correct state, the ESEARCH command MUST return a "BAD" result. a correct state, the ESEARCH command MUST return a "BAD" result.
The client SHOULD NOT provide source options that resolve to The client SHOULD NOT provide source options that resolve to
including the same mailbox more than once. A server can, of course, including the same mailbox more than once. A server can, of course,
remove the duplicates before processing, but the server MAY return remove the duplicates before processing, but the server MAY return
"BAD" to an ESEARCH command with duplicate source mailboxes. "BAD" to an ESEARCH command with duplicate source mailboxes.
If the server supports the SEARCHRES [RFC5182] extension, then the If the server supports the SEARCHRES [RFC5182] extension, then the
"SAVE" result option is valid *only* if "selected" is specified or "SAVE" result option is valid only if "selected" is specified or
defaulted as the sole mailbox to be searched. If any source option defaulted as the sole mailbox to be searched. If any source option
other than "selected" is specified, the ESEARCH command MUST return a other than "selected" is specified, the ESEARCH command MUST return a
"BAD" result. "BAD" result.
If the server supports the CONTEXT=SEARCH and/or CONTEXT=SORT If the server supports the CONTEXT=SEARCH and/or CONTEXT=SORT
extension [RFC5267], then the following additional rules apply: extension [RFC5267], then the following additional rules apply:
o The CONTEXT return option (Section 4.2 of [RFC5267]) can be used o The CONTEXT return option (Section 4.2 of [RFC5267]) can be used
with an ESEARCH command. with an ESEARCH command.
o If the UPDATE return option is used (Section 4.3 of [RFC5267]), it o If the UPDATE return option is used (Section 4.3 of [RFC5267]), it
MUST apply ONLY to the currently selected mailbox. If UPDATE is MUST apply only to the currently selected mailbox. If UPDATE is
used and there is no mailbox currently selected, the ESEARCH used and there is no mailbox currently selected, the ESEARCH
command MUST return a "BAD" result. command MUST return a "BAD" result.
o The PARTIAL search return option (Section 4.4 of [RFC5267]) can be o The PARTIAL search return option (Section 4.4 of [RFC5267]) can be
used and applies to each mailbox searched by the ESEARCH command. used and applies to each mailbox searched by the ESEARCH command.
If the server supports the Access Control List (ACL) [RFC4314] If the server supports the Access Control List (ACL) [RFC4314]
extension, then the logged-in user is required to have the "r" right extension, then the logged-in user is required to have the "r" right
for each mailbox she wants to search. In addition, any mailboxes for each mailbox she wants to search. In addition, any mailboxes
that are not explicitly named (accessed through "personal" or that are not explicitly named (accessed through "personal" or
skipping to change at page 7, line 30 skipping to change at page 7, line 49
S: * ESEARCH (TAG "tag2" MAILBOX "folder2/salmon" UIDVALIDITY S: * ESEARCH (TAG "tag2" MAILBOX "folder2/salmon" UIDVALIDITY
1111111) UID ALL 50003,50006,50009,50012 1111111) UID ALL 50003,50006,50009,50012
S: tag2 OK done S: tag2 OK done
4. Formal Syntax 4. Formal Syntax
The following syntax specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur The following syntax specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur
Form (ABNF) as described in [RFC5234]. Terms not defined here are Form (ABNF) as described in [RFC5234]. Terms not defined here are
taken from [RFC3501], [RFC5465], or [RFC4466]. taken from [RFC3501], [RFC5465], or [RFC4466].
command-auth =/ esearch command-auth =/ esearch
; Update definition from IMAP base [RFC3501]. ; Update definition from IMAP base [RFC3501].
; Add new "esearch" command. ; Add new "esearch" command.
command-select =/ esearch command-select =/ esearch
; Update definition from IMAP base [RFC3501]. ; Update definition from IMAP base [RFC3501].
; Add new "esearch" command. ; Add new "esearch" command.
filter-mailboxes-other =/ ("subtree-one" SP one-or-more-mailbox) filter-mailboxes-other =/ ("subtree-one" SP one-or-more-mailbox)
; Update definition from IMAP Notify [RFC5465]. ; Update definition from IMAP Notify [RFC5465].
; Add new "subtree-one" selector. ; Add new "subtree-one" selector.
filter-mailboxes-selected = "selected" filter-mailboxes-selected = "selected"
; Update definition from IMAP Notify [RFC5465]. ; Update definition from IMAP Notify [RFC5465].
; We forbid the use of "selected-delayed". ; We forbid the use of "selected-delayed".
one-correlator = ("TAG" SP tag-string) / ("MAILBOX" SP astring) / one-correlator = ("TAG" SP tag-string) / ("MAILBOX" SP astring) /
("UIDVALIDITY" SP nz-number) ("UIDVALIDITY" SP nz-number)
; Each correlator MUST appear exactly once. ; Each correlator MUST appear exactly once.
scope-option = scope-option-name [SP scope-option-value] scope-option = scope-option-name [SP scope-option-value]
; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions. ; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions.
scope-option-name = tagged-ext-label scope-option-name = tagged-ext-label
; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions. ; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions.
scope-option-value = tagged-ext-val scope-option-value = tagged-ext-val
; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions. ; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions.
scope-options = scope-option *(SP scope-option) scope-options = scope-option *(SP scope-option)
; A given option may only appear once. ; A given option may only appear once.
; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions. ; No options defined here. Syntax for future extensions.
esearch = "ESEARCH" [SP esearch-source-opts] esearch = "ESEARCH" [SP esearch-source-opts]
[SP search-return-opts] SP search-program [SP search-return-opts] SP search-program
search-correlator = SP "(" one-correlator *(SP one-correlator) ")" search-correlator = SP "(" one-correlator *(SP one-correlator) ")"
; Updates definition in IMAP4 ABNF [RFC4466]. ; Updates definition in IMAP4 ABNF [RFC4466].
esearch-source-opts = "IN" SP "(" source-mbox [SP esearch-source-opts = "IN" SP "(" source-mbox [SP
"(" scope-options ")"] ")" "(" scope-options ")"] ")"
source-mbox = filter-mailboxes *(SP filter-mailboxes) source-mbox = filter-mailboxes *(SP filter-mailboxes)
; "filter-mailboxes" is defined in IMAP Notify [RFC5465]. ; "filter-mailboxes" is defined in IMAP Notify [RFC5465].
; See updated definition of filter-mailboxes-other, above. ; See updated definition of filter-mailboxes-other, above.
; See updated definition of filter-mailboxes-selected, above. ; See updated definition of filter-mailboxes-selected, above.
5. Security Considerations 5. Security Considerations
This new IMAP ESEARCH command allows a single command to search many This new IMAP ESEARCH command allows a single command to search many
mailboxes at once. On the one hand, a client could do that by mailboxes at once. On the one hand, a client could do that by
sending many IMAP SEARCH commands. On the other hand, this makes it sending many IMAP SEARCH commands. On the other hand, this makes it
easier for a client to overwork a server, by sending a single command easier for a client to overwork a server, by sending a single command
skipping to change at page 8, line 46 skipping to change at page 9, line 28
Implementations MUST, of course, apply access controls appropriately, Implementations MUST, of course, apply access controls appropriately,
limiting a user's access to ESEARCH in the same way its access is limiting a user's access to ESEARCH in the same way its access is
limited for any other IMAP commands. This extension has no data- limited for any other IMAP commands. This extension has no data-
access risks beyond what may be there in the unextended IMAP access risks beyond what may be there in the unextended IMAP
implementation. implementation.
Mailboxes matching the source options for which the logged-in user Mailboxes matching the source options for which the logged-in user
lacks sufficient rights MUST be ignored by the ESEARCH command lacks sufficient rights MUST be ignored by the ESEARCH command
processing (see the paragraph about this in Section 2.2). In processing (see the paragraph about this in Section 2.2). In
particular, any attempt to distinguish insufficient access from non- particular, any attempt to distinguish insufficient access from
existent mailboxes may expose information about the mailbox hierarchy non-existent mailboxes may expose information about the mailbox
that isn't otherwise available to the client. hierarchy that isn't otherwise available to the client.
If "subtree" is specified, the server MUST defend against loops in If "subtree" is specified, the server MUST defend against loops in
the hierarchy (see the paragraph about this in Section 2.2). the hierarchy (see the paragraph about this in Section 2.2).
6. IANA Considerations 6. IANA Considerations
The "IMAP Capabilities" registry is currently located at <http:// The "IMAP Capabilities" registry is currently located at
www.iana.org/assignments/imap-capabilities#imap-capabilities-1>. <http://www.iana.org/assignments/imap-capabilities#imap-
capabilities-1>.
IANA is asked to change the reference for the IMAP capability IANA is asked to change the reference for the IMAP capability
"MULTISEARCH", to point to this document. "MULTISEARCH" to point to this document.
7. Acknowledgements 7. Implementation Status
[[CREF2: RFC Editor: Please remove this section at publication.]]
This section records the status of known implementations of the
protocol defined by this specification at the time of posting of
this Internet-Draft, and is based on a proposal described in RFC
6982. The description of implementations in this section is
intended to assist the IETF in its decision processes in
progressing drafts to RFCs. Please note that the listing of any
individual implementation here does not imply endorsement by the
IETF. Furthermore, no effort has been spent to verify the
information presented here that was supplied by IETF contributors.
This is not intended as, and must not be construed to be, a
catalog of available implementations or their features. Readers
are advised to note that other implementations may exist.
According to RFC 6982, "this will allow reviewers and working
groups to assign due consideration to documents that have the
benefit of running code, which may serve as evidence of valuable
experimentation and feedback that have made the implemented
protocols more mature. It is up to the individual working groups
to use this information as they see fit".
The following implementations are known to exist:
o Oracle has a server implementation that is not currently in a
product.
o There is a client implementation that has been tested with the
Oracle server. No further information is available.
Interest has been expressed in creating the following
implementations:
o Isode Limited
8. Changes Since RFC 6237
o Change to Standards Track.
o Added paragraph about duplicate mailboxes.
o Added Section 2.3 about fuzzy search.
o Added Section 7, "Implementation Status".
[[CREF3: RFC Editor: Please remove this bullet at publication.]]
9. Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge feedback provided by Timo The authors gratefully acknowledge feedback provided by Timo
Sirainen, Peter Coates, Arnt Gulbrandsen, and Chris Newman. Sirainen, Peter Coates, Arnt Gulbrandsen, and Chris Newman.
8. References 10. References
10.1. Normative References
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997. Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[RFC2978] Freed, N. and J. Postel, "IANA Charset Registration [RFC2978] Freed, N. and J. Postel, "IANA Charset Registration
Procedures", BCP 19, RFC 2978, October 2000. Procedures", BCP 19, RFC 2978, October 2000.
[RFC3501] Crispin, M., "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION [RFC3501] Crispin, M., "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION
4rev1", RFC 3501, March 2003. 4rev1", RFC 3501, March 2003.
skipping to change at page 9, line 43 skipping to change at page 11, line 37
[RFC5182] Melnikov, A., "IMAP Extension for Referencing the Last [RFC5182] Melnikov, A., "IMAP Extension for Referencing the Last
SEARCH Result", RFC 5182, March 2008. SEARCH Result", RFC 5182, March 2008.
[RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax [RFC5234] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008.
[RFC5267] Cridland, D. and C. King, "Contexts for IMAP4", RFC 5267, [RFC5267] Cridland, D. and C. King, "Contexts for IMAP4", RFC 5267,
July 2008. July 2008.
[RFC5465] Gulbrandsen, A., King, C. and A. Melnikov, "The IMAP [RFC5465] Gulbrandsen, A., King, C., and A. Melnikov, "The IMAP
NOTIFY Extension", RFC 5465, February 2009. NOTIFY Extension", RFC 5465, February 2009.
10.2. Informative References
[RFC6203] Sirainen, T., "IMAP4 Extension for Fuzzy Search", RFC [RFC6203] Sirainen, T., "IMAP4 Extension for Fuzzy Search", RFC
6203, March 2011. 6203, March 2011.
Authors' Addresses Authors' Addresses
Barry Leiba Barry Leiba
Huawei Technologies Huawei Technologies
Phone: +1 646 827 0648 Phone: +1 646 827 0648
Email: barryleiba@computer.org Email: barryleiba@computer.org
URI: http://internetmessagingtechnology.org/ URI: http://internetmessagingtechnology.org/
Alexey Melnikov Alexey Melnikov
Isode Limited Isode Limited
5 Castle Business Village 5 Castle Business Village
36 Station Road 36 Station Road
Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2BX Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2BX
UK UK
Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com
URI: http://www.melnikov.ca/ URI: http://www.melnikov.ca/
 End of changes. 34 change blocks. 
67 lines changed or deleted 127 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.41. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/