Re: Notify extension to Sieve
Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com> Tue, 03 July 2001 19:56 UTC
Received: from localhost (localhost [[UNIX: localhost]]) by above.proper.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) id f63Juh127436 for ietf-mta-filters-bks; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:56:43 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dolk.extundo.com (dolk.extundo.com [195.42.214.242]) by above.proper.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f63Juem27432 for <ietf-mta-filters@imc.org>; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 12:56:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from barbar.josefsson.org (slipsten.extundo.com [195.42.214.241]) (authenticated) by dolk.extundo.com (8.11.3/8.11.3) with ESMTP id f63Junq09324; Tue, 3 Jul 2001 21:56:50 +0200
To: Wolfgang Segmuller <whs@watson.ibm.com>
Cc: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org
Subject: Re: Notify extension to Sieve
References: <2034209321.994171654@ballybran.diz.watson.ibm.com>
From: Simon Josefsson <jas@extundo.com>
In-Reply-To: <2034209321.994171654@ballybran.diz.watson.ibm.com> (Wolfgang Segmuller's message of "Tue, 03 Jul 2001 14:47:34 -0400")
Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 21:57:15 +0200
Message-ID: <ilu8zi5yeec.fsf@barbar.josefsson.org>
Lines: 44
User-Agent: Gnus/5.090004 (Oort Gnus v0.04) Emacs/21.0.103
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
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>
This looks cool! Some random questions/suggestions from a bystander: * I would be happier with two separate variables for the RFC 2822 "display name" and the "address". Having both the name and the mail address would fill up my entire cell phone display. Maybe keep $from$ as is, and add $from-address$ and $from-name$. Q: Is it intended to exclude legacy address forms by using the term "display name"? Perhaps no parsing of From: was intended. I.e.: foo@bar (foo bar) rather than "foo bar" <foo@bar>. * Are $subject$, $text$ etc QP/CTE-decoded? * Security consideration additions: The risk of creating mail loops must be considered, many instant messaging systems (e.g. ICQ) have capabilities to forward the notification by Internet Mail if you're not online. Unless somehow prevented, this might easily cause huge workload for the servers involved. * Is the draft really copyright 1999? :) There are some control characters (^M) in it as well. Also perhaps update RFC 82{1,2} -> RFC 282{1,2}. Wolfgang Segmuller <whs@watson.ibm.com> writes: > Abstract > > Users go to great lengths to be notified as quickly as possible that > they have received new mail. Most of these methods involve polling > to check for new messages periodically. A push method handled by the > final delivery agent gives users quicker notifications and saves > server resources. This document does not specify the notification > method but is expected that using existing instant messaging > infrastructure such as Zephyr, ICQ, or SMS messages will be popular. > This draft describes an extension to the Sieve mail filtering > language that allows users to give specific preferences for > notification of Sieve actions. > > > http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-martin-sieve-notify-01.txt > > Wolfgang Segmuller
- Notify extension to Sieve Wolfgang Segmuller
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve Simon Josefsson
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve Nigel Swinson
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve Tony Hansen
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve ned.freed
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve tmartin
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve Nigel Swinson
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve Tony Hansen
- Re: Notify extension to Sieve Wolfgang Segmuller