draft-ietf-extra-specialuse-important-00.txt   draft-ietf-extra-specialuse-important-01.txt 
Network Working Group B. Leiba, Ed. Network Working Group B. Leiba, Ed.
Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies Internet-Draft Huawei Technologies
Intended status: Standards Track March 22, 2018 Intended status: Standards Track April 19, 2018
Expires: September 21, 2018 Expires: October 19, 2018
IMAP $Important Keyword and \Important Special-Use Attribute IMAP $Important Keyword and \Important Special-Use Attribute
draft-ietf-extra-specialuse-important-00 draft-ietf-extra-specialuse-important-01
Abstract Abstract
RFC 6154 created an IMAP Special-Use LIST extension and defined an RFC 6154 created an IMAP Special-Use LIST extension and defined an
initial set of attributes. This document defines a new attribute, initial set of attributes. This document defines a new attribute,
"\Important", and establishes a new IANA registry for IMAP folder "\Important", and establishes a new IANA registry for IMAP folder
attributes, registering the attributes defined in RFCs 3348, 3501, attributes, registering the attributes defined in RFCs 3348, 3501,
and 6154. This document also defines a new IMAP keyword, and 6154. This document also defines a new IMAP keyword,
"$Important", and registers it in the registry defined in RFC 5788. "$Important", and registers it in the registry defined in RFC 5788.
skipping to change at page 1, line 35 skipping to change at page 1, line 35
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 21, 2018. This Internet-Draft will expire on October 19, 2018.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (c) 2018 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the Copyright (c) 2018 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 (http://trustee.ietf.org/
license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document. license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights
skipping to change at page 2, line 7 skipping to change at page 2, line 7
as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are as described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
provided without warranty as described in the Simplified BSD License. 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 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1.1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. Definition of the '$Important' Message Keyword . . . . . . . . 2 2. Definition of the '$Important' Message Keyword . . . . . . . . 2
3. Definition of the 'Important' Mailbox Attribute . . . . . . . 3 3. Definition of the 'Important' Mailbox Attribute . . . . . . . 3
3.1. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.1. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 3.2. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2.1. Example of a LIST Response . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3.2.2. Examples of Creating a New Mailbox using \Important . . . 4
4. Implementation Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 4. Implementation Notes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 5. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.1. Registration of the $Important keyword . . . . . . . . . . . 5 6.1. Registration of the $Important keyword . . . . . . . . . . . 5
6.2. Creation of the IMAP Mailbox Name Attributes Registry . . . 6 6.2. Creation of the IMAP Mailbox Name Attributes Registry . . . 6
6.2.1. Instructions to the Designated Expert . . . . . . . . . . 6 6.2.1. Instructions to the Designated Expert . . . . . . . . . . 7
6.3. Initial Entries for the IMAP Mailbox Name Attributes Registry 7 6.3. Initial Entries for the IMAP Mailbox Name Attributes Registry 7
7. Changes During Document Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 7. Changes During Document Development . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8 8. Contributors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 9.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1. Introduction 1. Introduction
The Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) specification [RFC3501] The Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP) specification [RFC3501]
defines the use of message keywords, and an IMAP Keywords registry is defines the use of message keywords, and an IMAP Keywords registry is
created in [RFC5788]. [RFC6154] defines an extension to the IMAP created in [RFC5788]. [RFC6154] defines an extension to the IMAP
LIST command for special-use mailboxes. The extension allows servers LIST command for special-use mailboxes. The extension allows servers
to provide extra information (attributes) about the purpose of a to provide extra information (attributes) about the purpose of a
mailbox and defines an initial set of special-use attributes. mailbox and defines an initial set of special-use attributes.
skipping to change at page 3, line 50 skipping to change at page 3, line 50
3.1. Formal Syntax 3.1. Formal Syntax
The following syntax specification adds to the one in [RFC6154], The following syntax specification adds to the one in [RFC6154],
Section 6, using Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) as described in Section 6, using Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) as described in
[RFC5234]. Be sure to see the ABNF notes at the beginning of [RFC5234]. Be sure to see the ABNF notes at the beginning of
[RFC3501], Section 9. [RFC3501], Section 9.
use-attr =/ "\Important" use-attr =/ "\Important"
3.2. Example 3.2. Examples
3.2.1. Example of a LIST Response
In the following example, the mailbox called "Important Messages" is In the following example, the mailbox called "Important Messages" is
the one designated with the "\Important" attribute. the one designated with the "\Important" attribute.
C: t1 list "" "Imp*" C: t1 LIST "" "Imp*"
S: * LIST (\HasNoChildren \Important) "/" "Important Messages" S: * LIST (\HasNoChildren \Important) "/" "Important Messages"
S: * LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "Imported Wine" S: * LIST (\HasNoChildren) "/" "Imported Wine"
S: t1 OK Success S: t1 OK Success
3.2.2. Examples of Creating a New Mailbox using \Important
In the following example, the mailbox called "Important Messages" is
created with the "\Important" attribute on a server that advertises
the "CREATE-SPECIAL-USE" capability string.
C: t1 CREATE "Important Messages" (USE (\Important))
S: t1 OK Mailbox created
The following example is similar to the previous one, but the server
is not able to assign the \Important attribute to the new mailbox.
C: t1 CREATE "Important Messages" (USE (\Important))
S: t1 NO [USEATTR] Mailbox not created; an \Important mailbox already exists
The following example is similar to the previous one, but the server
does not support this extension.
C: t1 CREATE "Important Messages" (USE (\Important))
S: t1 NO [USEATTR] Mailbox not created; unsupported use \Important
In both of the failure-mode examples, the "USEATTR" response code
lets the client know that the problem is in the "USE" parameters.
Note that the same response code is given in both cases, and the
human-readable text is the only way to tell the difference. That
text is not parsable by the client (it can only be logged and/or
reported to the user).
4. Implementation Notes 4. Implementation Notes
This section is non-normative and is intended to describe the This section is non-normative and is intended to describe the
intended (and current as of this publication) usage of "$Important" intended (and current as of this publication) usage of "$Important"
in contrast with "\Flagged" on a message. in contrast with "\Flagged" on a message.
On the server: On the server:
o \Flagged is set or cleared in response to an explicit command from o \Flagged is set or cleared in response to an explicit command from
the client. the client.
skipping to change at page 6, line 16 skipping to change at page 6, line 39
Note: None. Note: None.
6.2. Creation of the IMAP Mailbox Name Attributes Registry 6.2. Creation of the IMAP Mailbox Name Attributes Registry
IANA is asked to create a new registry in the group "Internet Message IANA is asked to create a new registry in the group "Internet Message
Access Protocol (IMAP)". The new registry will be called "IMAP Access Protocol (IMAP)". The new registry will be called "IMAP
Mailbox Name Attributes", and will have two references: "RFC 3501, Mailbox Name Attributes", and will have two references: "RFC 3501,
Section 7.2.2", and "[[THIS RFC]], Section 6". This registry will be Section 7.2.2", and "[[THIS RFC]], Section 6". This registry will be
shared with JMAP. shared with JMAP.
The registry entries will contain three fields: The registry entries will contain the following fields:
1. Attribute Name 1. Attribute Name
2. Description 2. Description
3. Reference 3. Reference
4. Usage Notes 4. Usage Notes
IANA will keep this list in alphabetical order by Attribute Name, IANA will keep this list in alphabetical order by Attribute Name,
which is registered without the initial backslash ("\"). The names which is registered without the initial backslash ("\"). The names
are generally registered with initial capital letters, but are are generally registered with initial capital letters, but are
treated as case-insensitive strings. treated as case-insensitive US-ASCII strings.
The "Usage Notes" field is free-form text that will normally be empty The "Usage Notes" field is free-form US-ASCII text that will normally
(and is empty if it's not specified in the registration request). It be empty (and is empty if it's not specified in the registration
is intended to hold things such as "not used by JMAP" and "JMAP request). It is intended to hold things such as "not used by JMAP"
only". The field is for human use, and there is no need for a and "JMAP only". The field is for human use, and there is no need
registry of strings that may appear here. for a registry of strings that may appear here.
The registration policy for the new registry will be listed as "IETF The registration policy for the new registry will be listed as "IETF
Review or Expert Review" [RFC8126], and new registrations will be Review or Expert Review" [RFC8126], and new registrations will be
accepted in one of two ways: accepted in one of two ways:
1. For registrations requested in an IETF consensus document, the 1. For registrations requested in an IETF consensus document, the
registration policy will be IETF Review, and the request will be registration policy will be IETF Review, and the request will be
made in the IANA Considerations section of the document, giving made in the IANA Considerations section of the document, giving
the requested values for each of the three fields. the requested values for each of the fields.
2. For other registrations, the policy will be Expert Review policy 2. For other registrations, the policy will be Expert Review policy
(see Section 6.2.1), and the request will be made by sending (see Section 6.2.1), and the request will be made by sending
email to IANA asking for a new IMAP Mailbox Name Attribute and email to IANA asking for a new IMAP Mailbox Name Attribute and
giving the requested values for each of the three fields. giving the requested values for each of the fields.
6.2.1. Instructions to the Designated Expert 6.2.1. Instructions to the Designated Expert
The expert reviewer, who will be designated by the IESG, is expected The expert reviewer, who will be designated by the IESG, is expected
to provide only a general review of the requested registration, to provide only a general review of the requested registration,
checking that the reference and description are adequate for checking that the reference and description are adequate for
understanding the intent of the registered attribute. Efforts should understanding the intent of the registered attribute. Efforts should
also be made to generalize the intent of an attribute so that also be made to generalize the intent of an attribute so that
multiple implementations with the same requirements may reuse multiple implementations with the same requirements may reuse
existing attributes. Except for this check, this is intended to be existing attributes. Except for this check, this is intended to be
very close to a first come first served policy, and the expert should very close to a first come first served policy, and the expert should
not block serious registration requests with a reasonable reference. not block serious registration requests with a reasonable reference.
The reference may be to any form of documentation, including a web The reference may be to any form of documentation, including a web
 End of changes. 20 change blocks. 
24 lines changed or deleted 54 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.46. The latest version is available from http://tools.ietf.org/tools/rfcdiff/