Re: Working Group Last Call for draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-00.txt

["Mark E. Mallett" <[e-mail]>]

On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 12:41:05PM -0700, Matthew Elvey wrote:
> On 8/21/05 7:54 AM, Alexey Melnikov sent forth electrons to convey:
> >right.  the key is that you decline a message which is sent from a
> >different administrative domain.  [...] a "refuse" MUST be able
> >to tell the other administrative domain that the message was rejected
> >without instantiating the sending of a new message.
> How's this replacement?
> 
> (The first sentence is unchanged.)
> 
>   The "refuse" action refuses delivery of a message by sending back
> 
> the 550 SMTP response code to an SMTP client. This extension can be 
> supported only by a Sieve implementation capable of sending the 550 over 
> an SMTP connection between Administrative Units.

Well, I'm probably being anal (again).  To me, the use of "between
Administrative Units" and "over the open Internet" are birds of a
feather.  I don't think it's important to specify where the message is
transported, or between whom-- only that the message is turned away by
the receiver during transport, thus avoiding a later asynchronous
notification via a separate email message.  e.g. I think refusal should
apply to a transmission to the SMTP server running on localhost.

mm