Re: [Extra] Sieve REJECT and :fcc [was Re: Meeting minutes and notes from today]

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> > On Jan 4, 2018, at 6:40 PM, Bron Gondwana <[e-mail]> wrote:
> >
> > Is everybody OK with having fcc not include reject, and having a separate capability (fcc-reject or similar) which administrators can decide whether or not to allow - and indeed, software implementations the choice whether or not to implement.
> >
> > That fixes both issues - those who really want the ability to lie can do so, but it's clear that they're enabling that facility, and it's also possible for both software vendors and administrators to not provide the facility in the first place.

> I personally think it should be up to administrators only, but I recognize
> that's an ugly hack to the spec already in place.  So I'm okay with it.

System-level (or if you prefer, administrative) sieve use is not something
our standards cover. They are exclusively focused on user sieves. And you can't 
simply throw in an administrative feature or three willy-nilly without looking
at the whole picture, which turns out to be fairly complicated.

Many years ago Jutta Degener and I proposed working on extending our documents
to cover the system-level case. There was some apetite for that, but
unfortunately the absoltuely appalling handling of sieve base specification
revision by the IESG at the time drained the energy of the group and that, as
they say, was that.

I certainly would not object to work in this area, but I'm skeptical that
there's sufficient interest.

				Ned