Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-08

"Spencer Dawkins" <spencer@wonderhamster.org> Tue, 20 January 2009 13:16 UTC

Return-Path: <gen-art-bounces@ietf.org>
X-Original-To: gen-art-archive@optimus.ietf.org
Delivered-To: ietfarch-gen-art-archive@core3.amsl.com
Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6BF753A6BE7; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:16:32 -0800 (PST)
X-Original-To: gen-art@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: gen-art@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id BAE333A68AC; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:16:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.32]) by localhost (core3.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id kUTL80oVr84g; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:16:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mout.perfora.net (mout.perfora.net [74.208.4.194]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7A1E3A67EC; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 05:16:29 -0800 (PST)
Received: from S73602b (cpe-72-190-78-151.tx.res.rr.com [72.190.78.151]) by mrelay.perfora.net (node=mrus0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MKp8S-1LPGSA2GUe-000Ski; Tue, 20 Jan 2009 08:15:43 -0500
Message-ID: <6486F03911DD4CD597DBBEA17AA9FF97@china.huawei.com>
From: Spencer Dawkins <spencer@wonderhamster.org>
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
References: <7CA30E7007064EB6B8929039C4604804@china.huawei.com> <495129BD.8000708@isode.com> <11495BE61CA54969ABD648641227CD20@china.huawei.com> <4975C0F1.2040508@isode.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 07:15:22 -0600
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.5512
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX1+Tz4z68gSo5gTlns9aAsgMFzr+uJUzbytTJO+ 8p7LvtwCvjyGRU6rkjq+sMi4YpCcVvHFCcXUdhSHLYBxb/epwi QSq7GEL/Pum9YnkOMgz3eMm+f2GkzGia3OVLkjIo/8=
Cc: General Area Review Team <gen-art@ietf.org>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa@osafoundation.org>, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [Gen-art] Gen-ART review of draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-08
X-BeenThere: gen-art@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: "GEN-ART: General Area Review Team" <gen-art.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art>, <mailto:gen-art-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/pipermail/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>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed"
Sender: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org
Errors-To: gen-art-bounces@ietf.org

Hi, Alexey,

That would be great - and thanks for continuing to think about my comments.

Spencer

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Alexey Melnikov" <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
To: "Spencer Dawkins" <spencer@wonderhamster.org>
Cc: <ietf@ietf.org>; "General Area Review Team" <gen-art@ietf.org>; "Lisa 
Dusseault" <lisa@osafoundation.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 6:17 AM
Subject: Re: Gen-ART review of draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-08


> Spencer Dawkins wrote:
>
>> Hi, Alexey,
>
> Hi Spencer,
>
>> Thanks for the quick response back... now I can remember what I said in 
>> the review ;-)
>>
>> Spencer
>>
>>> Spencer Dawkins wrote:
>>
> [...]
>
>>>> 5.  Security Considerations
>>>>
>>>>   Extensions defined in this document deliberately don't provide a way
>>>>   to modify annotations.
>>>>
>>>> Spencer: The next two paragraphs punt to "same as sieve script" - could 
>>>> you
>>>> provide a specific reference for the reader here?
>>>
>>> Reference to the Sieve document?
>>
>> If that's where the security considerations for sieve scripts are 
>> located - that would be fine.
>
> After thinking more about this: RFC 5228 (Sieve base) doesn't describe how 
> Sieve scripts are stored and how to handle failure to retrieve them - this 
> is out of scope for both documents. However I can add an example of what I 
> meant here - if a Sieve script is stored in LDAP and the script can't be 
> retrieved when a message is processed, then the agent performing Sieve 
> processing can, for example, assume that the script doesn't exist, or 
> delay message delivery until the script can be retrieved successfully. 
> Annotations should be treated as if they are a part of the script itself, 
> so a temporary failure to retrieve them should be handled in the same way 
> as a temporary failure to retrieve the Sieve script itself.
>
> 


_______________________________________________
Gen-art mailing list
Gen-art@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/gen-art