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

[Aaron Stone <[e-mail]>]

Great comments, thank you!

Cheers,
Aaron


On Tue, Dec 13, 2011 at 2:13 PM, Ben Campbell <[e-mail]> wrote:

> I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. For background on
> Gen-ART, please see the FAQ at <
> http://wiki.tools.ietf.org/area/gen/trac/wiki/GenArtfaq>.
>
> Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you
> may receive.
>
> Document: draft-ietf-sieve-include-13
> Reviewer: Ben Campbell
> Review Date: 2011-12-13
> IETF LC End Date: 2011-12-15
>
> Summary: This draft is almost ready for publication as a proposed standard
>
> Major issues:
>
> None
>
> Minor issues:
>
> -- section 3.1, paragraph 4: "Implementations MUST NOT generate errors for
> recursive inclusions at upload time, as this would force an upload ordering
> requirement upon script authors / generators.  However, if an active script
> is replaced with a faulty script and would remain the active script, an
> error MUST be generated and the upload MUST fail."
>
> These two statements seem contradictory on a quick reading.  In
> particular, how can the latter assertion avoid an upload ordering
> requirement? Or do you mean faulty in some way other than being recursive?
>
> -- section 3.4.1, paragraph 5: "If a "global" command is given the name of
> a variable that has previously been defined in the immediate script with
> "set", an error MUST be generated either when the script is uploaded or at
> execution time."
>
> Does this conflict with the previous statement that it is okay for a
> global and a private variable to have the same name?
>
> -- section 3.4.2:
>
> Why do you need two ways to accomplish the same thing?
>
> Does the global namespace have the same "requires" requirement as the
> global command?
>
> -- section 4.2, paragraph 2:
>
> Can you elaborate on what permissions are proper? Is it different for an
> included script than for any other script?
>
> -- section 4.2, paragraph 3:
>
> Can you elaborate on what you mean by "safe for a storage system"?
>
> Nits/editorial comments:
>
> -- section 3.1, paragraph 4: "authors / generators"
>
> s/ "authors / generators " / "authors and generators"
>
> -- section 3.2, paragraph 9 (Top of page 6): "
> The included script MUST be a valid Sieve script.  Each script MUST
>   have its own "require" statements for all optional capabilities used
>   by that script. "
>
> Who do these normative statements apply to? As worded, it sounds like they
> apply to the user. It might be better to say that the implementation MUST
> validate that…
>
> -- section 3.4.2, paragraph 3: "Variables declared global and variables
> accessed via the global namespace MUST be one and the same."
>
> Plurality mismatch. I suggest something like "a variable declared as
> global and a variable accesses with the global namespace, otherwise having
> the same name…"
>
> -- section 5:
>
> Please explicitly mention the name or URL of the registry table to which
> this should be added.
>
>
>