Re: [apps-discuss] Suggestions for draft-ietf-appsawg-sieve-duplicate-02

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> Hi Ned,

> --On February 1, 2014 at 10:09:59 AM -0800 Ned Freed
> <[e-mail]> wrote:

> > My suggestion would be to add an example of how *not* to use duplicate.
> > The
> > obvious one would be a usage that attempts to block individual cc's of
> > list mail. (Such an example can be found in the earlier discussion.)
> >
> > Beyond that, I'm still at a loss as to what, if anything, needs to be
> > added.

> I think the current spec does the best that it can do to address a common
> problem at delivery time, but as noted in this thread, that may not be
> enough to cover more complex situations. What we could do in the future is
> go a step further and improve handling of duplicates post delivery - i.e.
> within the mail store (IMAP).

> So perhaps what is needed is a complementary specification that adds
> improved duplicate handling to IMAP. The obvious use case is to have IMAP
> flag changes  applies across duplicate messages. This covers the common
> case of receiving the same message directly and via a list and wanting to
> "process" it (from the human perspective) only once. I suspect there are a
> lot of awkward scenarios that would need to be handled (e.g. what if a flag
> change is done when the first message arrives - should that change
> automatically apply when the duplicate is delivered). However, this might
> be worthwhile to consider - though it certainly should not block sieve
> duplicate from proceeding.

I don't quite see what duplicating flag changes would accomplish - it seems to
me that you really need to actually consolidate the two copies of the message 
in some way - but I am in complete agreement that some kinds of duplicate
elimination can only be made to work at the store level. And that's far beyond
the purview of hte present draft.

Whether or not that's implementable/deployable is another matter, of course.

				Ned