IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap

Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se> Sat, 12 May 2012 05:17 UTC

Return-Path: <paf@frobbit.se>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 579B921F85AD for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 May 2012 22:17:03 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.267
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.267 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.032, BAYES_00=-2.599, MIME_8BIT_HEADER=0.3]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4L+EKfC4F0Ph for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 11 May 2012 22:17:03 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from srv01.frobbit.se (srv01.frobbit.se [IPv6:2a02:80:3ffe::39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id ABE9D21F85A4 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 11 May 2012 22:17:02 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by srv01.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1113313C36674; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:17:02 +0200 (CEST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at frobbit.se
Received: from srv01.frobbit.se ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (srv01.frobbit.se [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id JsVrLja3Cs7D; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:17:01 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from [192.165.72.14] (unknown [192.165.72.14]) (Authenticated sender: paf01) by srv01.frobbit.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFE0D13C3666C; Sat, 12 May 2012 07:17:01 +0200 (CEST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1278)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From: Patrik Fältström <paf@frobbit.se>
In-Reply-To: <20120512025441.33697.qmail@joyce.lan>
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 07:17:01 +0200
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <23EDA338-4828-474C-96D4-FA55B187630B@frobbit.se>
References: <20120512025441.33697.qmail@joyce.lan>
To: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 05:17:03 -0000

On 12 maj 2012, at 04:54, John Levine wrote:

> I'd think that all we really need is a way for an IMAP client to set
> or unset a flag or status bit on a message saying that the user
> considers it to be spam, and the usual IMAP stuff to tell clients that
> the flag is available.  Once the flag is set, the advice would be to
> do whatever they do when they get a spam report from a user.  Maybe
> they move it to another folder, maybe they send an ARF report, but I
> don't think that needs to be (or even should be) normative.

+1

"Just" agree on a flag being "spam" and let clients and servers innovate and be clever.

   Patrik

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email