IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Extra] sieve-mailboxid: should specialuse override mailboxid?

Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com> Mon, 07 September 2020 01:44 UTC

Return-Path: <brong@fastmailteam.com>
X-Original-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EA5473A139A for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Sep 2020 18:44:29 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmailteam.com header.b=H/qKdls4; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=P8rmNru5
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id LASsx628RigG for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 6 Sep 2020 18:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out2-smtp.messagingengine.com (out2-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.26]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BA0963A1389 for <extra@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Sep 2020 18:44:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E5145C0099 for <extra@ietf.org>; Sun, 6 Sep 2020 21:44:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from imap7 ([10.202.2.57]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Sun, 06 Sep 2020 21:44:28 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= fastmailteam.com; h=mime-version:message-id:in-reply-to :references:date:from:to:subject:content-type; s=fm3; bh=HWswiOb zuXBpYxJwcLcyMN5Onlm9MwTmI+LHKYIxbMM=; b=H/qKdls4TNM6OFqy8Lr5ta+ vo9K/MPti3c7S0E5LSCb94aMnQW3HQzmn+xVh7qwBTF4CBZq3jdPaQff2/YgNeWS 9BuaC2BSlXqwyq0pl7PXDODEcGM2MKEPRZiQ8ObwhBVTFRZT28moZKuMhhUgwDom q9I4K7KNriGRVXwm+oML0UkhVo5mb7bIlbCYAFs/svGfgQCxlu09s+p5RuHxAUvG 0zGQuxHWfioCc9ORy6SIWk0SI7oOPJRuoYlPFzxiaSgvP4JUT4VkGOs8jIP1Gvxb UniQRLoXPHjn1JcAvIpZO5zMHJtLCIXkZrZPzfUzixYkNNQRUGr+hR93i6hhNaw= =
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=HWswiO bzuXBpYxJwcLcyMN5Onlm9MwTmI+LHKYIxbMM=; b=P8rmNru5sGSgodv8jubRUq 7qM9Fl1oVouOpqr97NQjvlDzp2Jc0rWW4tyn3M63JYbDyGIJLwW05+dti6LOyHP/ gESj3geVpKUepoYJbJ1M1nQDhhu4vWjmLLdmn7l778HAwh8iHQNzdfUHTleSalW6 Y7tJEMwGIHx2C6bltM6bd50W0HnfUFUcaGoWt2XKeaLFIItF7pBWAH4HcUGUdad1 et//irujtaifbpSFVU5bnwdhTSNhIg8mMKr/UW3xOFZozK5CkC0JKZYnWV5dXP42 Gj1kcFOE1S6GwUDK1YWunYEuYnU6HqJ9F0ieHqq7kCoOs3cH4HzArU01sMIr0JTg ==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:e5BVX1fgXS4neOg8kmRcVvqiORPCsMNITi8MyFNXZOBb6Hvo6g_wJw> <xme:e5BVXzPLsJ91HPIzyPtHnG-2Ae-Wx7D8zD9K722tA6lH0kXrF0c0aLNgqrgFZ5M3D pi3WLzt3GY>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeduiedrudegkedggeejucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucenucfjughrpefofgggkfgjfhffhffvufgtsegrtd erreerredtnecuhfhrohhmpedfuehrohhnucfiohhnugifrghnrgdfuceosghrohhnghes fhgrshhtmhgrihhlthgvrghmrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpedvudeuieehgf dvheeuueejjeeuudfgiefgveetfeelteeffffgtdejjefgueduvdenucevlhhushhtvghr ufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegsrhhonhhgsehfrghsthhmrg hilhhtvggrmhdrtghomh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:e5BVX-iuOlmMIJd8XOgGiuWHSYs7zIMwY9HMwSkGhMccvzH6YHJFiQ> <xmx:e5BVX-9U5GmVooxq7VsT4IsJXs-0PsWrBwMYl-NuPi1NC_pHtrRt-A> <xmx:e5BVXxuoHgXHgP6FnmErYOpf0rOvMC4Q4niiHh8wZ-sCYkKb5mNL_g> <xmx:fJBVX_5eU0op_BwqkAP6St7V7JsvAgIQfKGeQ0knYULtULSdn61wVA>
Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 91219180096; Sun, 6 Sep 2020 21:44:27 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
User-Agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.3.0-259-g88fbbfa-fm-20200903.003-g88fbbfa3
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <3a0ea9f3-984d-4304-806c-ab22d6e2d300@dogfood.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <93ffd5ac-b570-45ff-bd7c-5cfea7512828@www.fastmail.com>
References: <93ffd5ac-b570-45ff-bd7c-5cfea7512828@www.fastmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2020 11:44:07 +1000
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com>
To: extra@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="e6901fce4bc849938e6bd8475acf7f31"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/Q677t6X1rAC2CdWcArH6TmG9QCs>
Subject: Re: [Extra] sieve-mailboxid: should specialuse override mailboxid?
X-BeenThere: extra@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email mailstore and eXtensions To Revise or Amend <extra.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/extra/>
List-Post: <mailto:extra@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Sep 2020 01:44:30 -0000

On Mon, Sep 7, 2020, at 11:04, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> Barry proposed that we switch the order, and the specialuse takes priority over the mailboxid.  I am happy to make this change and can see that it makes sense.  Does anybody else have any strong opinions about this?  I will make the change in -04, but if there's more discussion to have then I'm happy to revert it.

Actually I looked at the text, and it's going to be significantly more complex to switch it :(  By doing mailboxid first, we can then just fall through to the process in RFC8579 including the special behaviour for :create which adds the special-use.

If we intersperse mailboxid then we're going to have to define the process again, and the possibility for confusion is much worse.

Based on that, I think I'd like to keep the existing behaviour - have mailboxid be resolved first and then fall back to specialuse.  If you don't want that, then don't specify a mailboxid at all!  It's not as if it will be created with that ID anyway.

Bron.


--
  Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd
  brong@fastmailteam.com

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email