Internet DRAFT - draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap
draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap
Network Working Group Z. Ordogh
Internet-Draft Research In Motion Limited
Intended status: Experimental March 11, 2013
Expires: September 12, 2013
Spam reporting using IMAP: SREP
draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-04
Abstract
This document defines an IMAP extension which allows a client to
report spam by reference and allows an IMAP server to perform any
action on the reported messages, including leaving the action at the
client's discretion.
In addition, this document discusses how an IMAP server can tap into
spam aggregator services, ultimately allowing the IMAP server to
improve its decision-making process.
Conventions Used In This Document
In examples, "C:" and "S:" indicate lines sent by the client or the
server, respectively.
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", and "MAY"
in this document are to be interpreted as described in [RFC2119].
This specification follows the recommendations in [XDASH].
Status of This Memo
This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF). Note that other groups may also distribute
working documents as Internet-Drafts. The list of current Internet-
Drafts is at http://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 12, 2013.
Copyright Notice
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 1]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
Copyright (c) 2013 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
document authors. All rights reserved.
This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
Provisions Relating to IETF Documents
(http://trustee.ietf.org/license-info) in effect on the date of
publication of this document. Please review these documents
carefully, as they describe your rights and restrictions with respect
to this document. Code Components extracted from this document must
include Simplified BSD License text as described in Section 4.e of
the Trust Legal Provisions and are provided without warranty as
described in the Simplified BSD License.
This document may contain material from IETF Documents or IETF
Contributions published or made publicly available before November
10, 2008. The person(s) controlling the copyright in some of this
material may not have granted the IETF Trust the right to allow
modifications of such material outside the IETF Standards Process.
Without obtaining an adequate license from the person(s) controlling
the copyright in such materials, this document may not be modified
outside the IETF Standards Process, and derivative works of it may
not be created outside the IETF Standards Process, except to format
it for publication as an RFC or to translate it into languages other
than English.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Scope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
3. The SREP command . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3.1. Directives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.2. Abuse types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.3. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
3.4. Part identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.5. Request Action . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
3.6. Responses and Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3.7. Formal Syntax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
3.8. Examples to report spam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
3.9. Examples to report messages as no longer spam . . . . . . 10
3.10. Example flows . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
3.10.1. The server simply flags a message . . . . . . . . . . 11
4. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 2]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
1. Introduction
The Internet Message Access Protocol [IMAP4] does not support
reporting spam on its own. There are a number of solutions available
based on the multipart/report content type defined in [OLD-REPORT]
and its revision, [REPORT]. However, these solutions require
including the message contents and hence, consume bandwidth to
transmit the entire message. In bandwidth-constrained environments -
such as mobile networks - it is highly desirable to send only a
minimum set of information - a reference - instead of the entire
message. Solutions that exist today employ manipulating proprietary
flags in the IMAP storage to achieve the bare minimum, however more
advanced solutions cannot be developed by using flags only; the IMAP
server needs to be involved actively in the spam reporting process.
Furthermore, it is highly desirable to permit individual server
implementations to handle spam in any way these systems choose to: do
nothing, flag, perform deletion or relocation, recommend deletion or
relocation to the client, or, leave the decision at the client's
discretion as a whole. However, in order to make such a decision on
the server side, a spam aggregator service, such as [OMA-SPAMREP],
needs to be involved in the decision-making process.
This document specifies a new IMAP command, SREP, along with its
syntax, which allows a client to inform the server that the user
considered a message (or parts thereof) spam, or, that the user no
longer considers a message (or parts thereof) spam. Since all
information about the message is readily available on the server, the
command also allows the server to implement a more intelligent and
accurate decision logic, which may be invoked when the spam is
reported and the server can respond with its decision to the client.
Additionally, this document contains example flows, illustrating
various decisions that the server may choose to evaluate, including
invoking an aggregator service, such as one based on [OMA-SPAMREP].
The SREP command allows:
reporting spam; i.e. set the spam condition, and,
reporting that a message (that was reported spam earlier) is no
longer spam; i.e. clear the spam condition.
2. Scope
This document focuses only on the client-server interactions and the
scope is limited to messages that either exist on the IMAP server,
or, exist elsewhere and the IMAP server is configured to access them.
Consequently, deposit-time filtering, messages that have been
deleted, and messages that exist in an external storage but are
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 3]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
accessible only via an access protocol unknown to the IMAP server are
out of scope.
3. The SREP command
The SREP command follows the conventions of [IMAP4].
Arguments:
directive; see Section 3.1
OPTIONAL abuse type; see Section 3.2
reference; see Section 3.3
OPTIONAL list of part identifiers; see Section 3.4
OPTIONAL request action; see Section 3.5
Responses; see Section 3.6:
OPTIONAL OK response: RELOCATE
OPTIONAL OK response: RELOCATED
OPTIONAL OK response: DELETE
OPTIONAL OK response: DELETED
OPTIONAL OK response: KEYWORD
Result:
OK - command completed successfully
NO - the server cannot access one or more messages (deleted or
unauthorized)
BAD - there was an error during processing the command (syntax or
unsupported parameter)
The formal syntax of the SREP command is defined in Section 3.7.
The SREP command allows:
- reporting spam; i.e. set the spam condition, and,
- reporting that a message (that was reported spam earlier) is no
longer spam; i.e. clear the spam condition.
The SREP command may be used with any IMAP4 server implementation
that returns "SREP" as one of the supported capabilities in response
to the CAPABILITY command. If the server does not indicate support
for the SREP capability, the client MUST NOT use the SREP command.
The SREP command may result in ambiguity, therefore the client MUST
NOT send any commands before the result of the SREP command has been
received, see Section 5.5 in [IMAP].
The command MAY be issued on one or more messages at a time, in the
currently selected mailbox.
The command MAY be extended in the future with new parameters
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 4]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
(actions, directives, reference types, etc). Servers MUST be able to
recognize parameters unknown to them and respond with a BAD response
in case they encounter such a parameter.
3.1. Directives
The directive argument tells the server whether a message is being
reported as a spam, or, it is being reported as no longer a spam.
The SREP command MUST include the directive. To report a spam, the
directive MUST be SET. To report that a message is no longer
considered to be a spam, the directive MUST be CLEAR.
Extensions are permitted, as defined in Section 3.7.
3.2. Abuse types
The client may have additional information about the spam regarding
the nature of the abuse. When such information is available, the
client SHOULD include the abuse type argument in the request. When
such information is not available, the client MUST omit the abuse
type argument from the request. When the directive argument is
CLEAR, the client MUST omit the abuse type argument from the request.
This specification defines the following abuse types:
1. Phishing (forgery, link manipulation, etc.): an attempt to
divulge information from the recipient by masquerading the sender
and/or the content(s) of the message as a trustworthy form of
communication.
2. Malware (virus, spyware, etc.): a malicious piece of software
code embedded or attached to the message specifically designed to
disrupt normal operation, gather sensitive information, gain
unauthorized access, and/or perform other abusive behavior upon
execution.
Extensions are permitted, as defined in Section 3.7.
3.3. References
The reference argument consists of a reference type and a reference
value. In general, the reference type MUST indicate the format of
the reference while the reference value MUST contain a value
corresponding to the indicated reference format. To use a unique
identifier specified in [IMAP4], the reference type MUST be UID and
the reference value MUST be a number expressing the unique identifier
of the message. To use a sequence set specified in [IMAP4], the
reference type MUST be SEQ and the reference value MUST be sequence
numbers corresponding to the specified message sequence number set.
To use an authorized URL specified in [URLAUTH], the reference type
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 5]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
MUST be URLAUTH and the reference value MUST be an URLAUTH-authorized
URL, authorizing the entire message.
Extensions are permitted, as defined in Section 3.7.
3.4. Part identifiers
When the reference identifies one and only one message, the list of
part identifiers MAY be included to improve the accuracy of spam
detection. When the reference identifies more than one message, the
list of part identifiers MUST be omitted.
The list of part identifiers is a parenthesized list of part
identifiers. Part identifiers MAY identify header fields or bodies.
Header field identifiers MUST be prefixed with the word 'header' and
the dot ('.') character MUST be used as the separator character.
Header fields MUST be identified by the name of the header field.
Example:
The 'From' header field is identified as 'header.from'.
Body identifiers MUST be prefixed with the word 'body' and the dot
('.') character MUST be used as the separator character. Bodies MUST
be identified by their positions within the message hierarcy, where
the first position is 1 and the main level is 1. To refer the entire
body of a message (or all bodies of a multipart message), the
separator character, the position MUST be omitted.
Examples:
- The entire body of a message (or all bodies of a multipart
message) is identified as 'body'.
- Considering a simple multipart message, the part following the
first boundary is identified as 'body.1'.
- Considering a multipart message that includes an email
attachment following the second boundary, and the email attachment
containing text following the first boundary, the text within the
email message is identified as 'body.2.1'.
The formal syntax of the part-id-list is defined in Section 3.7.
3.5. Request Action
The request action argument explicitly tells the server what to do
with the the message. To request a specific action from the server
explicitly, the SREP command MUST include the request action
argument. To not request a specific action, the SREP command MUST
NOT include the request action argument; in this case, the server
MUST decide the course of action. The client MAY specify either one
of the following actions:
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 6]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
- The KEYWORD the client requests that only keyword(s) should be
added to the message. The server MUST add the appropriate
keyword.
- The RELOCATE the client requests that the message should be
relocated. The server MUST relocate the message by copying the
message to the destination mailbox removing the original as if
another connected client requested this action using an IMAP MOVE
[IMAPMOVE] command.
- The DELETE the client requests that the message should be
deleted. The server MUST delete the message as if another client
performed this action.
The server MUST ignore the destination mailbox in case it is nil, or,
the request action is KEYWORD or DELETE. It is assumed that the
server is pre-configured with the location where user's spam messages
are stored. If the server is not configured with such information
and the destination mailbox in a RELOCATE action is nil, or,
destination mailbox in a RELOCATE action is otherwise inaccessible to
the user (does not exist, insufficient permission, etc) the the
server MUST reject the request (see BAD response in Section 3.6).
NOTE: While the DELETE action does not seem appropriate in case the
directive argument is CLEAR, it is permitted. The formal syntax of
the request action argument is defined in Section 3.7.
3.6. Responses and Results
The SREP command MAY result in system flag changes, keyword changes,
message relocation, message removal, or a combination of these.
The result of the command MUST be either OK, NO or BAD:
- The OK result MUST be returned only in case the server parsed
and completed the command successfully.
- The NO result MUST be returned only in case the server parsed
the command successfully, but there is a problem with the
referenced message(s) that prevents the server from completing the
requested actions, such as one or more messages do not exist on
the server, one or more messages are not properly authorized by
URLAUTH, etc.
- The BAD result MUST be returned only in case the server cannot
parse the command, or a configuration error is preventing the
server from completing the requested actions.
When the result is OK, the response to a SET directive MUST be either
KEYWORD, RELOCATE, RELOCATED, DELETE, or DELETED.
When the result is OK, the response to a CLEAR directive MUST be
either KEYWORD, RELOCATE, or RELOCATED.
The server responses are:
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 7]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
- The KEYWORD response occurs in case this specific action has
been explicitly requested by the client, or, in case the server
decided that only the keywords should be updated either because it
does not wish to give any recommendation to the client (RELOCATE
or DELETE), or, because it does not have sufficient information
either internally, or, from the spam aggregator service that it is
configured to use.
- The RELOCATE response occurs in case the server decided that the
message should be relocated, however leaves this action to the
client. The client MAY decide what to do with the message.
- The RELOCATED response occurs in case this specific action has
been explicitly requested by the client, or, in case the server
decided that the message should be relocated and it performed
relocation of the message to the appropriate location before the
response was sent. The server MUST relocate the message by
copying the message to the appropriate location and removing the
original as if another connected client requested this action
using an IMAP MOVE [IMAPMOVE] command.
- The DELETE response occurs in case the server decided that the
message should be deleted, however leaves this action to the
client. The client MAY decide what to do with the message.
- The DELETED response occurs in case this specific action has
been explicitly requested by the client, or, in case the server
decided that the message should be deleted, and performed deletion
of the message before the response was sent. The server MUST
delete the message as if another client performed this action.
The KEYWORD, RELOCATE and DELETE responses MUST include the list of
flags/keywords that have been added or removed. Added keywords MUST
be prefixed with a plus sign ('+'), while removed keywords MUST be
prefixed with a minus sign ('-'). The RELOCATED and DELETED
responses MUST NOT include keywords. The formal syntax of the
actions is defined in Section 3.7.
3.7. Formal Syntax
This document extends the formal syntax defined in [IMAP4] using the
Augmented Backus-Naur Form (ABNF) notation specified in [ABNF].
Note: all string literals are case insensitive.
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 8]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
srep-command = "SREP" SP directive *1(SP abuse-type) SP \
reference *1(SP part-id-list) \
*1(SP request-action)
directive = "SET" / "CLEAR" / directive-ext
directive-ext = atom
; It is not required that new directives
; begin with "X-", see [XDASH]
abuse-type = "AT" SP abuse-type-id
abuse-type-id = 1*DIGIT
; no leading zeroes or signs
; New abuse types MUST be registered with
; IANA as standard or standards-track
reference = reference-type SP reference-value
reference-type = "UID" / "SEQ" / "URLAUTH" / reference-type-ext
reference-type-ext = atom
; It is not required that new reference types
; begin with "X-", see [XDASH]
reference-value = uniqueid / ; see [IMAP]
sequence-set / ; see [IMAP]
authorized-url / ; see [URLAUTH]
reference-value-ext
authorized-url = authimapurlfull / ; see [URLAUTH]
authimapurlrump ; see [URLAUTH]
reference-value-ext = atom
; New reference values MUST correspond to
; reference-type-ext
part-id-list = "(" part-id *(SP part-id) ")"
part-id = header-id / body-id
header-id = "header." header-fld-name
; see header-fld-name in [IMAP]
body-id = "body" *("." 1*DIGIT)
; no leading zeroes or signs in numberic part
request-action = "DO" SP req-action *1(SP destination-box)
req-action = "KEYWORD" /
"RELOCATE" /
"DELETE"
destination-box = mailbox / nil
resp-text-code = resp-spam-actions ; responses specific to
; this command, extending
; existing resp-text-code
; defined in [IMAP]
resp-spam-actions = "KEYWORD" flag-list / ; see flag-list in [IMAP]
"RELOCATE" flag-list /; see flag-list in [IMAP]
"RELOCATED" /
"DELETE" flag-list / ; see flag-list in [IMAP]
"DELETED"
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 9]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
3.8. Examples to report spam
Report single message as spam; no identified parts; server only flags
the message and hints that it should be moved:
C: Z020 SREP SET SEQ 10
S: Z020 OK [RELOCATE +$OMAEVVM10-spam-user-identified] SREP
Completed.
Report single message as spam; header and body identified; server
adds the appropriate flags and hints that it should be deleted:
C: Z040 SREP SET SEQ 9 (header.from body.2)
S: Z040 OK [DELETE (+$OMAEVVM10-spam-user-identified-field.from
+$OMAEVVM10-spam-user-identified-body.2)] SREP Completed.
Report single message as spam; no identified parts; server moves the
message (may clear/set flags too, but that is irrelevant because the
client will need to reconcile anyway).
C: Z060 SREP SET SEQ 8
S: Z060 OK [RELOCATED] SREP Completed.
Report single message as spam; no identified parts; server deletes
the message.
C: Z080 SREP SET SEQ 6
S: Z080 OK [DELETED] SREP Completed.
Report single message as spam; no identified parts; client requests
explicitly to delete the message, server deletes the message as the
client requested.
C: Z100 SREP SET SEQ 4 DO DELETE NIL
S: Z100 OK [DELETED] SREP Completed.
3.9. Examples to report messages as no longer spam
Report single message as no longer spam; no identified parts; server
only clears the appropriate flags from the message.
C: Z020 SREP CLEAR SEQ 10
S: A020 OK [KEYWORD -$OMAEVVM10-spam-user-identified] SREP
Completed.
Report single message as no longer spam; earlier the header and body
were identified as spam; the server clears the appropriate flags.
C: Z040 SREP CLEAR SEQ 9
S: A040 OK [KEYWORD (-$OMAEVVM10-spam-user-identified-field.from
-$OMAEVVM10-spam-user-identified-body.2)] SREP Completed.
Report single message as no longer spam; no identified parts; server
moves the message (may set/clear flags, too but that is irrelevant
because the client will need to reconcile anyway).
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 10]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
C: Z060 SREP CLEAR SEQ 8
S: A060 OK [RELOCATED] SREP Completed.
3.10. Example flows
The new command specified in this document allows a client to save
significant bandwidth by sending only reference(s) instead of full-
blown spam reports that most if the time include the entire message.
By doing so, the responsibility of recording metadata and handling
the message designated as spam has been shifted to the server side.
It is not the purpose of IMAP servers to deal with various aspects of
spam reporting, such as creating and storing metadata, making the
metadata available when new messages arrive, etc. IMAP servers
should take advantage of an aggregator service and perform the
exchanges related to spam reporting in the background, delegating the
work to the aggregator service. Spam aggregator services are
expected to collect and store metadata in very large volumes,
evaluate the stored metadata and support queries to decide whether an
incoming message is a spam or not. Open Mobile Alliance (OMA)
specified the [OMA-SPAMREP] enabler release that supports deploying
such aggregator services.
The flows in the following sub-sections illustrate informative
examples for various scenarios that may be triggered by the SREP
command defined in Section 3.
3.10.1. The server simply flags a message
1. The user finds a voicemail that he/she deems to be spam.
2. He invokes the appropriate functions on the client to report the
message as spam.
3. The client reports the spam using the appropriate command to the
server: SREP SET SEQ 10
4. The server prepares the message referenced by the command for
inquiry.
5. The server queries its internal database for precedence.
6. The server gets a 'not found' response from the internal
database.
7. The server queries an external database for precedence, such as
an aggregator service based on [OMA-SPAMREP].
8. The server gets a 'not found' response from the external
database as well.
9. No records of the message are found; the server prepares the
message to be recorded for future reference.
10. The server reports the message as spam to its internal database.
11. The server gets an 'ok' response from the internal database.
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 11]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
12. The server reports the message as spam to external database,
such as an aggregator service based on [OMA-SPAMREP].
13. The server gets an 'ok' response from the external database.
14. The server checks the user's preferences and finds no guidance
about handing the spam, so
15. ... it checks the service provider policies - and yet again,
finds no instructions.
16. In the end, lacking any sort of guidance, the end the server
stores a keyword for the message, and
17. ... informs that client about that using the appropriate
response: OK [KEYWORD +$OMAEVVM10-spam-user-identified]
Completed.
18. The client updates its representation of the voicemail
repository and
19. ... the message turns red on the user interface.
20. The user cheers.
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 12]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
User Client Server Server Aggregator
DB Service DB
|---- | | | |
| | 1 | | | |
|<--- | | | |
| 2 | | | |
|--------->| 3 | | |
| |--------->| | |
| | |---- | |
| | | | 4 | |
| | |<--- | |
| | | 5 | |
| | |--------->| |
| | | 6 | |
| | |<---------| |
| | | 7 |
| | |-------------------->|
| | | 8 |
| | |<--------------------|
| | |---- | |
| | | | 9 | |
| | |<--- | |
| | | 10 | |
| | |--------->| |
| | | 11 | |
| | |<---------| |
| | | 12 |
| | |-------------------->|
| | | 13 |
| | |<--------------------|
| | |---- | |
| | | | 14 | |
| | |<--- | |
| | |---- | |
| | | | 15 | |
| | |<--- | |
| | |---- | |
| | | | 16 | |
| | 17 |<--- | |
| |<---------| | |
| |---- | | |
| | | 18 | | |
| 19 |<--- | | |
|<---------| | | |
|---- | | | |
| | 20 | | | |
|<--- | | | |
| | | | |
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 13]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
4. Acknowledgements
The author acknowledges and appreciates the work and comments from
Josh Soref, Gaelle Martin-Cocher, Suresh Chitturi, Clara Severino and
Christophe Le Thierry D'Ennequin.
5. IANA Considerations
This document constitutes registration of the SREP capability in the
imap4-capabilities registry.
SREP command directives are registered by publishing a standards
track or IESG-approved experimental RFC. The registry is currently
located at: http://www.iana.org/assignments/spam-directive-registry
SREP command abuse types are registered by publishing a standards
track or IESG-approved experimental RFC. The registry is currently
located at: http://www.iana.org/assignments/spam-abuse-type-registry
SREP command reference types are registered by publishing a standards
track or IESG-approved experimental RFC. The registry is currently
located at:
http://www.iana.org/assignments/spam-reference-type-registry
All registries are case insensitive.
This document constitutes the following registrations with IANA:
IMAP SREP Directive Registry
Directive Reference
--------- ---------
SET [this document]
CLEAR [this document]
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 14]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
IMAP SREP Abuse Type Registry
Abuse Type Reference
---------- ---------
1 - Phishing [this document]
2 - Malware [this document]
IMAP SREP Reference Type Registry
Reference Type Reference
-------------- ---------------
UID [this document]
SEQ [this document]
URLAUTH [this document]
Note to RFC Editor: replace "[this document]" with the RFC number
before publication.
6. Security Considerations
When an aggregator service is actively involved in a deployment, the
service provider MUST ensure that:
- a mutual trust relation is in place between the IMAP server and
the aggregator service, and,
- the aggregator service does not leak any information.
See additional security considerations in [IMAP4] and [URLAUTH],
respectively.
7. References
7.1. Normative References
[ABNF] Crocker, D. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
Specifications: ABNF", RFC 5234, January 2008.
[IMAP4] Crispin, M., "INTERNET MESSAGE ACCESS PROTOCOL -
VERSION 4rev1", RFC 3501, March 2003.
[IMAPMOVE] Gulbrandsen, A. and N. Freed, "Internet Message Access
Protocol (IMAP) - MOVE Extension", RFC 6851,
January 2013.
[RFC2119] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 15]
Internet-Draft IMAP Spam March 2013
Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[URLAUTH] Crispin, M., "Internet Message Access Protocol (IMAP)
- URLAUTH Extension", RFC 4467, May 2006.
[XDASH] Saint-Andre, P., Crocker, D., and M. Nottingham,
"Deprecating the "X-" Prefix and Similar Constructs in
Application Protocols", RFC 6648, June 2012.
7.2. Informative References
[OLD-REPORT] Vaudreuil, G., "The Multipart/Report Content Type for
the Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages",
RFC 3462, January 2003.
[OMA-SPAMREP] Open Mobile Alliance, "Mobile Spam Reporting 1.0, OMA-
ERP-SpamRep-V1_0".
[REPORT] Kucherawy, M., "The Multipart/Report Content Type for
the Reporting of Mail System Administrative Messages",
RFC 6522, January 2012.
Author's Address
Zoltan Ordogh
Research In Motion Limited
1875 Buckhorn Gate
Mississauga, Ontario L4W 5P1
Canada
Phone: +19056294746x15674
Fax: +12892615950
EMail: zordogh@blackberry.com
Ordogh Expires September 12, 2013 [Page 16]
