idnits 2.17.1 draft-ietf-extra-imap-64bit-01.txt: Checking boilerplate required by RFC 5378 and the IETF Trust (see https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info): ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/1id-guidelines.txt: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- No issues found here. Checking nits according to https://www.ietf.org/id-info/checklist : ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- ** There are 3 instances of too long lines in the document, the longest one being 3 characters in excess of 72. -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC3501, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC7888, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. -- The draft header indicates that this document updates RFC4466, but the abstract doesn't seem to mention this, which it should. Miscellaneous warnings: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- == The copyright year in the IETF Trust and authors Copyright Line does not match the current year (Using the creation date from RFC3501, updated by this document, for RFC5378 checks: 1997-09-12) -- The document seems to contain a disclaimer for pre-RFC5378 work, and may have content which was first submitted before 10 November 2008. The disclaimer is necessary when there are original authors that you have been unable to contact, or if some do not wish to grant the BCP78 rights to the IETF Trust. If you are able to get all authors (current and original) to grant those rights, you can and should remove the disclaimer; otherwise, the disclaimer is needed and you can ignore this comment. (See the Legal Provisions document at https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info for more information.) -- The document date (September 18, 2017) is 2411 days in the past. Is this intentional? Checking references for intended status: Proposed Standard ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- (See RFCs 3967 and 4897 for information about using normative references to lower-maturity documents in RFCs) == Missing Reference: 'RFC7888' is mentioned on line 155, but not defined == Unused Reference: 'RFC2088' is defined on line 192, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC3516' is defined on line 205, but no explicit reference was found in the text == Unused Reference: 'RFC4466' is defined on line 209, but no explicit reference was found in the text ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 2088 (Obsoleted by RFC 7888) ** Obsolete normative reference: RFC 3501 (Obsoleted by RFC 9051) Summary: 3 errors (**), 0 flaws (~~), 5 warnings (==), 5 comments (--). Run idnits with the --verbose option for more detailed information about the items above. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Network Working Group A. Melnikov 3 Internet-Draft Isode Ltd 4 Updates: 3501, 4466, 7888 (if approved) SB. Jayantheesh 5 Intended status: Standards Track Samsung Electronics America 6 Expires: March 22, 2018 September 18, 2017 8 64bit body part and message sizes in IMAP4 9 draft-ietf-extra-imap-64bit-01.txt 11 Abstract 13 This document defines an IMAPv4rev1 extension that extends the 14 existing IMAPv4rev1 32 Bit message and body part sizes to 63 bit. 16 Status of This Memo 18 This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the 19 provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79. 21 Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering 22 Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute 23 working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet- 24 Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/. 26 Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months 27 and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any 28 time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference 29 material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." 31 This Internet-Draft will expire on March 22, 2018. 33 Copyright Notice 35 Copyright (c) 2017 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the 36 document authors. All rights reserved. 38 This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal 39 Provisions Relating to IETF Documents 40 (https://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of 41 publication of this document. Please review these documents 42 carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect 43 to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must 44 include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of 45 the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as 46 described in the Simplified BSD License. 48 This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF 49 Contributions published or made publicly available before November 50 10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this 51 material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow 52 modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process. 53 Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling 54 the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified 55 outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may 56 not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format 57 it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other 58 than English. 60 Table of Contents 62 1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 63 2. Requirements Notation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 64 3. 64bit Extension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 65 4. IMAP Protocol Changes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 66 5. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 67 6. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 68 7. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 69 8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 70 9. Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 71 10. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 72 Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 74 1. Introduction 76 IMAP [RFC3501] only allows body parts or message sizes which are 32 77 bit. This document introduces an IMAP extension that allows for 78 message and body part sizes to be 63 bit. 80 The client wishing to use this extension MUST issue ENABLE 64BIT. 81 Refer [RFC5161] for the usage of ENABLE command. 83 2. Requirements Notation 85 The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", 86 "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this 87 document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119]. 89 In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client and 90 server respectively. If a single "C:" or "S:" label applies to 91 multiple lines, then the line breaks between those lines are for 92 editorial clarity only and are not part of the actual protocol 93 exchange. 95 3. 64bit Extension 97 An IMAP server that supports the 64bit extension advertises this by 98 including the name 64BIT in its CAPABILITY list in the authenticated 99 state. The server may also advertise this extension before the user 100 has logged in. If this capability is omitted, no information is 101 conveyed about the server's status of supporting this extension. 103 IMAP server should respond with BAD response for the 64bit message 104 size messages sent by the IMAP client unless it issues "ENABLE 64BIT" 105 in the current connection. 107 4. IMAP Protocol Changes 109 TBD. 111 5. Examples 113 C: t1 CAPABILITY 114 S: * CAPABILITY IMAP4rev1 ID 64BIT 115 S: t1 OK foo 116 C: t2 ENABLE 64BIT 117 S: * ENABLED 64BIT 118 S: t2 OK foo 120 6. Formal Syntax 122 The following syntax specification uses the Augmented Backus-Naur 123 Form (ABNF) notation as specified in [ABNF]. 125 Non-terminals referenced but not defined below are as defined by 126 [RFC3501]. 128 All alphabetic characters are case-insensitive. The use of upper or 129 lower case characters to define token strings is for editorial 130 clarity only. Implementations MUST accept these strings in a case- 131 insensitive fashion. 133 body-extension =/ number64 134 ; Alexey: I am not sure if this change is absolutely needed! 136 body-fld-lines = number64 138 body-fld-octets = number64 140 fetch-att =/ "BODY" section ["<" number64 "." nz-number64 ">"] / 141 "BODY.PEEK" section ["<" number64 "." nz-number64 ">"] 143 literal = "{" number64 ["+"] "}" CRLF *CHAR8 144 ; number64 represents the number of CHAR8s. 145 ; NOTE: "+" can only present when LITERAL+/LITERAL- 146 ; is also advertised 148 literal8 = "~{" number64 ["+"] "}" CRLF *OCTET 149 ;; Updating RFC 4466 version. 150 ;; A string that might contain NULs. 151 ;; represents the number of OCTETs 152 ;; in the response string. 153 ;; The "+" is only allowed when both LITERAL+/LITERAL- 154 ;; and BINARY extensions are supported by the server 155 ;; [RFC7888] 157 msg-att-static =/ "RFC822.SIZE" SP number64 159 search-key =/ "LARGER" SP number64 / "SMALLER" SP number64 161 number64 = 1*DIGIT 162 ; Unsigned 63-bit integer 163 ; (0 <= n <= 9,223,372,036,854,775,807) 165 nz-number64 = digit-nz *DIGIT 166 ; Unsigned 63-bit integer 167 ; (0 < n <= 9,223,372,036,854,775,807) 169 CHAR8 = 171 7. Security Considerations 173 TBD. 175 This document doesn't raise any other security concerns not already 176 raised by [RFC3501]. 178 8. IANA Considerations 180 IANA is asked to add "64BIT" to the IMAP Capabilities registry, using 181 this document as its reference. 183 9. Acknowledgments 185 TBD. 187 10. Normative References 189 [ABNF] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax 190 Specifications: ABNF", STD 68, RFC 5234, January 2008. 192 [RFC2088] Myers, J., "IMAP4 non-synchronizing literals", RFC 2088, 193 DOI 10.17487/RFC2088, January 1997, 194 . 196 [RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate 197 Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, 198 DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997, 199 . 201 [RFC3501] Crispin, M., "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL - VERSION 202 4rev1", RFC 3501, DOI 10.17487/RFC3501, March 2003, 203 . 205 [RFC3516] Nerenberg, L., "IMAP4 Binary Content Extension", RFC 3516, 206 DOI 10.17487/RFC3516, April 2003, 207 . 209 [RFC4466] Melnikov, A. and C. Daboo, "Collected Extensions to IMAP4 210 ABNF", RFC 4466, DOI 10.17487/RFC4466, April 2006, 211 . 213 [RFC5161] Gulbrandsen, A., Ed. and A. Melnikov, Ed., "The IMAP 214 ENABLE Extension", RFC 5161, DOI 10.17487/RFC5161, March 215 2008, . 217 Authors' Addresses 219 Alexey Melnikov 220 Isode Ltd 221 14 Castle Mews 222 Hampton, Middlesex TW12 2NP 223 UK 225 Email: Alexey.Melnikov@isode.com 226 Jayantheesh S B 227 Samsung Electronics America 228 685 US Highway 202/206 229 Bridgewater, New Jersey 08807 230 USA 232 Email: jayantheesh.sb@gmail.com