Re: [MORG] I-D Action:draft-ietf-morg-list-specialuse-03.txt

Alexey Melnikov <> Wed, 17 November 2010 05:48 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 600583A6882 for <>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:48:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id euWSLstb2L0J for <>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5B9E33A6872 for <>; Tue, 16 Nov 2010 21:47:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] ( []) by (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id <>; Wed, 17 Nov 2010 05:48:35 +0000
Message-ID: <>
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 05:48:04 +0000
From: Alexey Melnikov <>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
To: Barry Leiba <>
References: <> <> <> <>
In-Reply-To: <>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: Timo Sirainen <>,
Subject: Re: [MORG] I-D Action:draft-ietf-morg-list-specialuse-03.txt
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: Messaging Organization <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 17 Nov 2010 05:48:12 -0000

Hi Barry,

Barry Leiba wrote:

>>>>I think the document could use a note explaining that the special-use
>>>>flags apply only to the authenticated user's personal mailboxes.  (Or
>>>>the opposite, if you so desire!)  In other words, if you did a LIST
>>>>on another user's mailboxes (per NAMESPACE), should the \Inbox show
>>>>up on their INBOX?
>>>Ah, good point. I think \Inbox and friends shouldn't be shown for
>>>INBOXes (etc.) of other users.
>I wonder when y'all last read this doc: \Inbox has been out for a while now.
>I'm not sure we want to restrict things, and forbid using a shared
>mailbox for some functions.
That is not what I meant. I was saying that a mailbox marked as \Inbox 
for you must not be returned as \Inbox for me, *unless* I mark the same 
mailbox as \Inbox in my view of IMAP universe.

>While I agree that in most cases you'll
>want to have all the special-use boxes in the user's private
>namespace, I'd rather keep any discussion of that as non-normative
>What do you folks think of that suggestion?