Re: [sieve] SIEVE WG Status

[Barry Leiba <[e-mail]>]

Hi, Cyrus, and thanks for the update.

> draft-ietf-sieve-autoreply
> draft-ietf-sieve-external-lists
> draft-ietf-sieve-notify-presence
> draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-seconds
>
> These should all be published soon (having mostly been blocked on
> external-lists which was recently approved). Thanks to everyone for their
> work on these.

We can actually ask the ADs to release the hold on the three earlier
drafts.  They were not actually waiting on a normative reference to
external-lists.  It was an AD-requested hold to make sure that the
external-lists URI questions were settled down so that the examples
would be correct.  Now that external-lists is in the RFC-ed queue, the
other three docs can go ahead.  I'm copying Pete, asking him to ask
the RFC Editor to go ahead and process autoreply, notify-presence, and
vacation-seconds, and I will correct the examples in AUTH48.

>  (1) Finish work on existing in-progress Working Group documents:
>      (b) Notify SIP (draft-ietf-sieve-notify-sip-message)
>      (c) RegEx (draft-ietf-sieve-regex)
>      (e) Sieve in IMAP (draft-ietf-sieve-imap-sieve)
>
>  (2) Finalize and publish the following SIEVE extensions as proposed
>  standards:
>      (d) Convert messages (draft-melnikov-sieve-convert)

For (b) and (d), one of the authors (Sun Qian from Huawei) now has
other responsibilities.  My Huawei colleague Kepeng Li and I have
taken over his part of the work, and Kepeng has done an update on them
both.  We're now waiting for me to do a pass on them, which I expect
to get to this week or next.  So these will soon have a new version,
and we can finish them up.

For (e), I have an almost-ready version that's been almost ready for a
while.  I will finish it up and submit it after I get the
aforementioned two done, so expect it, also, within the next two
weeks.  It should address all of Ned's comments from the last round of
reviews, and so it should be pretty close to being a finished
version... I hope.

>  (3) Work on a specification for iCalendar and vCard extraction, and
>  cooperate with the VCARDDAV WG for address book tests in Sieve.

External-lists probably does all we really need for address book
tests, and I agree with dropping this one.

>  (4) Work on a specification to describe how EAI/IDN issues should be
>  handled in SIEVE.

I don't really see EAI picking this up, but I think there isn't much,
if anything, that needs to be done, and we can address it later,
either in the working group (if it hadn't been closed by then) or as
an individual submission.

>  (5) Work on a "Benefits of SIEVE" guide for client and server vendors

I agree with dropping this, unless someone can get a reasonable first
draft put together before Québec.

>  (6) Produce one or more informational RFCs containing a set of test
>  scripts and test email messages that are to be filtered by the scripts,
>  and the expected results of that filtering. This will serve as the basis
>  of a interoperability test suite to help determine the suitability of
>  moving the base specification and selected extensions to Draft status.

It seems to me that no one thinks it's important to move the base spec
to DS.  In any case, the huge number of extensions makes it seem a bit
pointless to move base to DS by itself, without bringing a suite of
the most useful/important extensions with it, and that's not happening
soon, I don't think.  Yes, let's drop this.

> Next question: does anyone have any new SIEVE work they would like to
> propose at this time?

I think we have what we need, and we should wrap up what we're doing,
declare success, and drink lots of beer.  (That said, I don't think
there's a need to hurry to close it without finishing the work in
progress, and (except perhaps for RegEx) we will soon finish it.  I
should say we'd have the remaining open docs (except perhaps for
RegEx) to the IESG by the end of August.

Barry