Re: [sieve] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sieve-imap-sieve-08.txt

Stephan Bosch <stephan@rename-it.nl> Thu, 13 September 2012 19:25 UTC

Return-Path: <stephan@rename-it.nl>
X-Original-To: sieve@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sieve@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7012421F84C5 for <sieve@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:25:58 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.204
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.204 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.300, BAYES_00=-2.599, HELO_EQ_NL=0.55, HOST_EQ_NL=1.545]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([64.170.98.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P-Ci9CKLqJgx for <sieve@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:25:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from drpepper.rename-it.nl (drpepper.rename-it.nl [217.119.238.16]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D11C021F84B8 for <sieve@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 12:25:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from klara.student.utwente.nl ([130.89.162.218]:51721 helo=[10.168.3.2]) by drpepper.rename-it.nl with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <stephan@rename-it.nl>) id 1TCF2n-0000Uo-6d; Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:25:51 +0200
Message-ID: <5052332F.3060407@rename-it.nl>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 21:25:35 +0200
From: Stephan Bosch <stephan@rename-it.nl>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20120907 Thunderbird/15.0.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Barry Leiba <barryleiba@computer.org>
References: <20120910211613.16818.36778.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <504EFB8F.7000806@rename-it.nl> <CAC4RtVApjXKJbwCLBPryh1YeJ-BgWxOKNHAzo56HR4Lhc4O=gg@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAC4RtVApjXKJbwCLBPryh1YeJ-BgWxOKNHAzo56HR4Lhc4O=gg@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-RenameIT-MailScanner-SpamScore: -2.3 (--)
X-RenameIT-MailScanner-SpamCheck: No, score=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED, BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.3.1
Cc: sieve@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [sieve] I-D Action: draft-ietf-sieve-imap-sieve-08.txt
X-BeenThere: sieve@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIEVE Working Group <sieve.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/sieve>, <mailto:sieve-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/sieve>
List-Post: <mailto:sieve@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:sieve-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/sieve>, <mailto:sieve-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 19:25:58 -0000

On 9/13/2012 9:05 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
> Oy.
> These comments are VERY late, and the document has already gone
> through IESG approval.  I'll look at them and see what I think we can
> address now.

My previous comments were late already and I wonder why I missed these ones.

> I also have a question for the working group:
> In his IESG evaluation review, Robert Sparks has this comment:
>
> << The environment names live in a global space - other extensions might want to
> put a cause into the environment. Would it be worth the pain to scope the name
> _this_ extension is adding to this extension ("imapcause" or something like
> that)? >>
>
> I think that's a reasonable change, and will change "cause" to
> "imapcause", unless there's objection from the WG (and one or two
> "That sounds fine." comments would be good).

That sounds fine.

> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 4:51 AM, Stephan Bosch <stephan@rename-it.nl> wrote:
>> There is no changelog in the document, so I wondered what changed
> That's why &deity made diffs.  When you go to the tools page:
>     http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-sieve-imap-sieve
> ...you can click on "Diff1" if you like strike-out diffs or "Diff2" if
> you like side-by-side diffs.  Tools are your friends.

Indeed they are; good to know. It's good that I didn't use that though, 
otherwise I would not have made these comments. :)

>> #2) Section 2.2.2 suggests that there is a MULTIAPPEND command for IMAP.
>> There is no such thing: it is an IMAP capability that extends APPEND to
>> accept multiple messages at once. I would merge this with the previous
>> section:
> I have added this second paragraph to 2.2.1, eliminated 2.2.2, and
> eliminated the other references to a MULTIAPPEND command:
>
>      If the IMAP server also supports the IMAP MultiAppend extension
>      <xref target="RFC3502"/>, the APPEND command can create more
>      than one message at a time.
>      In that case, each message creation is considered a separate
>      event, and any applicable Sieve script is called once for each
>      message.

Agreed.

>> I also gave the issue of useless script triggers, i.e. events that are never
>> of interest for the script involved, some more thought. For example, I would
>> hate to have my Sieve script executed for each message that I read (added
>> \Seen flag) while it doesn't do anything useful with that event. Wouldn't it
>> be useful to have a `/shared/imapsieve/cause' Metadata item that indicates
>> which causes (the items from Section 7.3.1 in a space-separated list) should
>> trigger the Sieve script? More detailed control could be used to select
>> specific flags that are relevant (e.g. in a '/share/imapsieve/changedflags'
>> Metatada item).
> It might, and we considered this, but rejected the complexity.  I
> don't think this is the time to reconsider it.

Yes, I agree. This document is too far along. I'll remember this for a 
future revision/extension.

Regards,

Stephan.