Re: SASL-IR (draft-siemborski-imap-sasl-initial-response-05.txt)

[Ken Murchison <murch@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:

> I am not aware of any problems with the draft as it now stands. Please 
> review it and notify me if you see any (I'm sure you will if you try 
> hard). I'd also like to hear about any implementations. Thank you.

It probably goes with out saying, but Cyrus IMAP has implemented this 
from day one.

A few nits on the draft, mostly outdated references.

- Section 2: Even though I know what RFC4422 and RFC3501 are, I'd like 
to see the acronyms used with the references.  e.g.

"The [RFC4422} ..."      ->  "The SASL [RFC4422] ..."
"... any [RFC3501] ..."  ->  "... any IMAP [RFC3501] ..."
"... any [RFC4422] ..."  ->  "... any SASL [RFC4422] ..."

- Section 3: Both instances of RFC3548 should be replaced with RFC4648 
(Base64 is now in Section 4 rather than Section 3)

- Section 3, paragraph 2, sentence 1:  As in my first nit, I'd like to 
see "... the [RFC3548] data ..."  ->  "... the BASE64 [RFC4648] data ..."

- Section 4: RFC2595 should be replaced with RFC4616

- Section 4: Both instances of RFC2246 should be replaced with RFC4346

--
Kenneth Murchison
Systems Programmer
Project Cyrus Developer/Maintainer
Carnegie Mellon University