RE: [lemonade] LEMONADE vs. P-IMAP

[<Zoltan.Ordogh at nokia.com>]

Hi Stephane,

>It should have been clear to all and was clear stated for 
>example in the latest published version that P-IMAP was our 
>submission to the IETF and OMA process as well as an interim 
>solution awaiting the standard.

Are You suggesting that there will be a third solution in OMA (beside
LEMONADE and DS -based MEM)?

>P-IMAp is not the object of any separate standardization 
>activity. IETF Lemonade and OMA MEM are where this is happening.

P-IMAP is separate in LEMONADE - so it is not LEMONADE as pointed out by
Randall - or is Randall's statement incorrect?
In OMA, MEM is based on LEMONADE and DS - but not P-IMAP (hence my
question above about a third MEM solution in OMA).

It seems to me that there is a confusion about it in LEMONADE as well.

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