Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.txt
Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Thu, 22 June 2006 17:40 UTC
Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k5MHefLb002329; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:40:41 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org)
Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5/Submit) id k5MHefLr002328; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:40:41 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org)
X-Authentication-Warning: balder-227.proper.com: majordom set sender to owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org using -f
Received: from kalyani.oryx.com (kalyani.oryx.com [195.30.37.30]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id k5MHeecp002314 for <ietf-mta-filters@imc.org>; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 10:40:40 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no)
Received: from libertango.oryx.com (libertango.oryx.com [195.30.37.9]) by kalyani.oryx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 413444AC71 for <ietf-mta-filters@imc.org>; Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:40:39 +0200 (CEST)
Message-Id: <VDicT1vMVA8s3t19eCUsuQ.md5@libertango.oryx.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 19:41:03 +0200
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.txt
References: <E1FsSZF-0001qb-KM@stiedprstage1.ietf.org> <449937B5.1040307@andrew.cmu.edu> <44993E8B.9000703@isode.com> <PnjW7vzn2nzWQGJ3qjrDqQ.md5@libertango.oryx.com> <449AD41C.1070604@isode.com>
In-Reply-To: <449AD41C.1070604@isode.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-mta-filters/mail-archive/>
List-ID: <ietf-mta-filters.imc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-mta-filters-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
Alexey Melnikov writes: > If the message satisfies both a & c (or both c & d), then this SHOULD > result in a runtime error. That's not nice. After all, c might easily be a spam test and a might be "from colleagues", and that doesn't sound like it should provoke a runtime error. I'd prefer that reject either turns itself into a noop if one of the incompatible actions are also taken, or that they're compatible. Either way, please specify what "incompatible" means. Arnt
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.txt Internet-Drafts
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.… Ken Murchison
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.… Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.… Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.… Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.… Mark E. Mallett