Re: [lemonade] Taking the knife to METADATA

[Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@xxxxxxxxx>]

Cyrus Daboo wrote:

> Hi folks,
> There have been several discussions at the IETF meeting about METADATA. Its 
> clear that implementers want a "lighter" version. Here are some proposals 
> based on those discussions and other comments during last call:
>
> 1) Remove the dependency on LISTEXT. This basically means turning the clock 
> back to the original ANNOTATEMORE extension. So the GETMETADATA command 
> would be used to retrieve mailbox annotations as well as server annotations.
>  
That is fine with me.

You forgot handling on comparators in GETMETADATA.

> 2) Remove attributes. i.e. 'value' and 'size' attributes will be removed. 
> There will only be a value. The .priv and .shared suffixes will then be 
> applied to the entry names.
>  
I am not convinced this is needed. I am really concerned about people 
putting big annotations on the server and then clients being flooded 
with traffic.

> 3) Entries are case insensitive.
>  
I am neutral on this one. I can be convinced both ways.

> 4) Wildcards not allowed in SETMETADATA.
>  
That would be fine with me.

> 5) Only register /comment for both server and mailbox annotations, and 
> /admin for server annotations in this document.
>  
+1.

> Please comment on these so we can move forward with this extension, thanks.
>  

Some other things that need to be addressed:

Clarify access controls for various metadata items.