IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Extra] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-melnikov-extra-sieve-action-registry-00.txt

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Thu, 19 August 2021 14:13 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.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 2BE763A19D3 for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:13:55 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.099
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.099 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, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.com
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 3CC4ucfyv-Z1 for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:13:49 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from statler.isode.com (Statler.isode.com [62.232.206.189]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B2FB73A19D0 for <extra@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 07:13:49 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1629382427; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=N5DXA3KHprouBTLrlaq99jXRy9Z1/HxvUOZU/NPznwk=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=rSvbF0IholmrwGKsnv3JZaQtuBjaES5xhYK7w+ZsF1WRlM3hhkV5psBnD21ZDg8iozxbuq VAnE08K0C2pmvLKBgtFavCQuC1MD+dgxI00j0GkZ10iQQHphWjG+fDqDcYiU1PbaEU8b/h bCDk8QY2DhBxmJkecsnIrdve3t3+4mg=;
Received: from [192.168.1.222] (host31-49-142-56.range31-49.btcentralplus.com [31.49.142.56]) by statler.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <YR5nGgBawcHj@statler.isode.com>; Thu, 19 Aug 2021 15:13:47 +0100
To: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com>, extra@ietf.org
References: <161643427235.7381.17207301914025967780@ietfa.amsl.com> <726c373e-4f62-45e8-7951-24fa552ebd8c@isode.com> <46518277-9fe8-9b41-a3f0-cf3f8c906634@fastmail.com> <5dde348f-be68-0437-ce7d-276d87211f38@isode.com> <5d2ba878-2160-4169-82f6-a2147750989a@dogfood.fastmail.com> <46e4e5c6-f778-77d2-a78e-1a15ef33a49e@isode.com> <0cd416a9-1fae-4d7a-b901-5348ff99fecc@dogfood.fastmail.com>
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Message-ID: <f1dc67dc-ebda-7ce4-085f-ce8b88781e4c@isode.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 15:13:40 +0100
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
In-Reply-To: <0cd416a9-1fae-4d7a-b901-5348ff99fecc@dogfood.fastmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------34A846F56FEA5F5BC281CFCA"
Content-Language: en-GB
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/UApXTTqwnkujExpZc4KHTwvOsdg>
Subject: Re: [Extra] Fwd: I-D Action: draft-melnikov-extra-sieve-action-registry-00.txt
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: Thu, 19 Aug 2021 14:13:55 -0000

Hi Bron,

On 19/08/2021 15:09, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2021, at 22:34, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bron,
>>
>> On 19/08/2021 13:07, Bron Gondwana wrote:
>>> Oh hey - I missed this back in the day too.
>>>
>>> Yes please Alexey, just upload this without the melnikov in it, the 
>>> doc idea was already accepted.
>>
>> I just posted it. It requires chairs' approval.
>>
> Done.  I assume it's going to need to be filled out with an initial 
> set of registry entries and references to all the existing methods 
> specified in existing drafts?

I think this is up to the WG to decide.

My current [minor] preference is to list suggested additions in the 
draft, but strip them before the RFC is published. This is so that the 
final RFC doesn't contain stale information.

Similar approach was taken with the language-tag registry and possibly 
others.

Best Regards,

Alexey

v2.8.7 | Report a Bug | By Email