Re: [lemonade] WGLC compress-02: multiple COMPRESS algorithms

[Tony Hansen <tony at att.com>]

Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
> Dave Cridland writes:
>> On Mon Jul 31 16:22:12 2006, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>> I think we should use:
>>>
>>>       capability =/ "COMPRESS=" algorithm
>>>                      ;; multiple COMPRESS capabilities allowed
>>>
>>> because existing clients don't usually parse anything after the '=' sign.
>> I'm happier with that too, it matches how AUTH and THREAD work.
> 
> Agreed. In fact I'm very unhappy with anything else (absent arguments).

This is fine.

The intro should correspondingly be changed to:

    A server which supports the COMPRESS extension indicates this with
    one or more capability names consisting of "COMPRESS=" followed by a
    supported compression algorithm name as described in this document.

    The goal of the COMPRESS extension is to reduce the bandwidth usage
    of IMAP.  On regular IMAP connections, the PPP or MNP compression
    used with many low-bandwidth links compresses IMAP well. However,
    when TLS is used, PPP/MNP compression is ineffective. TLS too may
    provide compression, but a careful IMAP implementation can do much
    better.

    In order to increase interoperation, it is desirable to have as few
    different compression algorithms as possible, so this document
    specifies only one, DEFLATE.  The DEFLATE algorithm is standard,
    widely available, unencumbered by patents and fairly efficient.
    Hopefully it will not be necessary to define additional algorithms.

	Tony Hansen
	tony at att.com

_______________________________________________
lemonade mailing list
lemonade at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/lemonade