IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [sieve] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-seconds-00

Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name> Tue, 28 September 2010 14:25 UTC

Return-Path: <cyrus@daboo.name>
X-Original-To: sieve@core3.amsl.com
Delivered-To: sieve@core3.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B0F573A6D0C for <sieve@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:25:05 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.581
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.581 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.018, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 n7Ik3sJayDkL for <sieve@core3.amsl.com>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:25:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from daboo.name (daboo.name [151.201.22.177]) by core3.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 77D083A6D16 for <sieve@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 07:25:04 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 923A419670C42 for <sieve@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 10:25:44 -0400 (EDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at daboo.name
Received: from daboo.name ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (chewy.mulberrymail.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 4J3Z1MHsGVA1 for <sieve@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 10:25:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from caldav.corp.apple.com (unknown [17.101.32.44]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7E5AC19670C37 for <sieve@ietf.org>; Tue, 28 Sep 2010 10:25:43 -0400 (EDT)
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 10:25:40 -0400
From: Cyrus Daboo <cyrus@daboo.name>
To: sieve@ietf.org
Message-ID: <C6629974957979FEB0C4A10E@caldav.corp.apple.com>
In-Reply-To: <71EB8E3802322E332D80AA89@caldav.corp.apple.com>
References: <71EB8E3802322E332D80AA89@caldav.corp.apple.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.1.0a1 (Mac OS X)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline; size="934"
Subject: Re: [sieve] Working Group Last Call: draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-seconds-00
X-BeenThere: sieve@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
List-Id: SIEVE Working Group <sieve.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/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: Tue, 28 Sep 2010 14:25:05 -0000

Hi,
Some comments on draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-seconds-00:

Section 2: a maximum of 2**31 seems a little excessive. Also, the base 
vacation spec does allow sites to override the maximum value (:days MUST be 
> 7, SHOULD be > 30). I think it makes sense to at least allow a similar 
maximum limit for :seconds. I would suggest MUST be >= 86,400 (1 day).

Section 2: base vacation spec does not allow a minimum of zero. Why do we 
allow it here? If it is OK here, perhaps we should add some text calling 
this out as one key difference from the base vacation behavior.

Section 4: Second sentence seems a little weak. It only says 
implementations "SHOULD consider the number of auto-replies ... generated". 
It does not state why that is important, or what might be done to alleviate 
any problem related to it. So I think we need some more text here.

Section 5: Please change the contact email to <sieve@ietf.org>.

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email