IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Gen-art] [sieve] Gen-ART Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sieve-include-13

Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com> Fri, 13 January 2012 16:58 UTC

Return-Path: <ben@nostrum.com>
X-Original-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3258F21F864E; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:58:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.29
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.29 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.310, BAYES_00=-2.599, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 X3t0BT8EHLtw; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:58:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from nostrum.com (nostrum-pt.tunnel.tserv2.fmt.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f03:267::2]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B47F921F8645; Fri, 13 Jan 2012 08:58:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dn3-53.estacado.net (vicuna-alt.estacado.net [75.53.54.121]) (authenticated bits=0) by nostrum.com (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id q0DGwN7t020153 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES128-SHA bits=128 verify=NO); Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:58:24 -0600 (CST) (envelope-from ben@nostrum.com)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
From: Ben Campbell <ben@nostrum.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVCng7L7x4859djHyYCQ+j40b_y7_V6Ff0=XC7aWRxuyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 10:58:28 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <B93A8C21-4556-46D2-A0C0-61952326ADE1@nostrum.com>
References: <E02C28C0-E664-4197-9594-FB12EDA53F1E@nostrum.com> <CAEdAYKU7FrmRA0agwW0ux60VVhHGE9Dc_0hdj+TRPLW9DxFRLg@mail.gmail.com> <2FF53820-1728-4FDE-843A-19E61CBB795D@nostrum.com> <CAEdAYKWehxeSVXaUD=_DbTREUBE6MCW8PyG1GhCkjpcQaQtPwg@mail.gmail.com> <CAC4RtVCng7L7x4859djHyYCQ+j40b_y7_V6Ff0=XC7aWRxuyLQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Received-SPF: pass (nostrum.com: 75.53.54.121 is authenticated by a trusted mechanism)
Cc: Sieve mailing list <sieve@ietf.org>, "gen-art@ietf.org Review Team" <gen-art@ietf.org>, Aaron Stone <aaron@serendipity.cx>
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] [sieve] Gen-ART Last Call Review of draft-ietf-sieve-include-13
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/gen-art>
List-Post: <mailto:gen-art@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2012 16:58:30 -0000

On Jan 13, 2012, at 9:13 AM, Barry Leiba wrote:

[…]

> 
> I think this isn't a protocol requirement, but a
> quality-of-implementation issue.  But I do think the document could
> have a paragraph discussing this, and warning of the consequences.

I concur that this is not so much a protocol issue as a documentation issue. I did not mean to imply things were broken; just that I found the intent to be unclear. I think such a paragraph would likely solve the issue.


Thanks!

Ben.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email