From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Sat Mar 1 12:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205001445.6686@qCEZRPs+VJj1xnvJLvh6jg X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Sat, 01 Mar 2008 12:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m21IbJqs004150 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 13:37:24 -0500 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 m21IEWZi011087 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:14:32 -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 m21IEWu8011085; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:14:32 -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 smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de (smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.62.220]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id m21IETu1011072 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 11:14:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from Dilyan.Palauzov@aegee.org) Received: from smtp.aegee.org (aegeeserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.131.80]) by smtp2.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 4.63 #1) id 1JVWE4-0004sD-6G; Sat, 01 Mar 2008 19:14:24 +0100 X-Mail-Sent-By-AEGEE.org-Account: didopalauzov Received: from [192.168.1.13] (d83-181-84-29.cust.tele2.de [83.181.84.29]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.aegee.org (8.14.2/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m21IELRD024570 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 18:14:24 GMT Message-ID: <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> Date: Sat, 01 Mar 2008 19:14:21 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: IETF Sieve WG Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> In-Reply-To: <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6064/Sat Mar 1 16:27:15 2008 on AEGEEserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Hello, I read the discussion from Juli 2007 about the reject concerns. There is still something that is not addressed in draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 -- early evaluation of scripts. More concrete I mean that a script can be executed after the RCPT TO and before the DATA stage, and then has a stop;. draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 2.1.1. Rejecting a message at the SMTP/LMTP protocol level Sieve implementations that are able to reject messages at the SMTP/ LMTP level MUST do so and SHOULD use the 550 response code. Note that if a message is arriving over SMTP and has multiple recipients, some of whom have accepted the message, Section 2.1.2 defines how to reject such a message. Does this mean, that a recipient cannot be rejected after RCPT TO: and before DATA: in a multi recipient message? In the discussion I have not seen why this shall not be possible. Със здраве, Дилян Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote: > On Wed, 2008-02-13 at 21:09 +0100, Дилян Палаузов wrote: >> Hello, >> >> If sieve scripts are written in the form: >> >> if (envelope tests....) { reject; stop;} >> some other tests and actions; >> >> the scripts can be applied once after the RCPT TO: command and once >> after the DATA command. If the first script calling is successful (stop; >> is reached without trying tests, that require headers or body), and the >> reject action is performed, then the sieve script can reject the message >> at the RCPT TO: level. > > see the thread "Re: List of open issues with Sieve reject draft > (draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-02.txt)" from 2006-07-11. > >> The application of such scripts is, e.g. for mailing lists, with scripts >> like >> >> if (recipient is a mailing list and sender is not allowed to post >> there) {reject; stop;} >> >> which will save the consequent NDRs, send from the mailing list >> software. This approach is not considered in >> draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06, 2.2 Action reject...However >> implementations MAY refuse delivery over protocol ..., if and only if >> all of the following conditions are true: 2. ... > > I agree it would be beneficial to allow early evaluation of Sieve > scripts, but I believe we need a separate draft to clarify how it should > work. it would be preferable if the refuse-reject document had some > text to indicate the possibility. > From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Sat Mar 1 16:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205018150.83884@E8+eSoQGlzt0Osq+phtQHQ X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Sat, 01 Mar 2008 16:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m21NFheX014639 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 18:15:48 -0500 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 m21Mxru2047003 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:59:53 -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 m21MxrgR047002; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:59:53 -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 ladle.sendmail.com (ladle.sendmail.com [209.246.26.53]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id m21MxpXg046993 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:59:52 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from guenther+mtafilters@sendmail.com) Received: from fife.sendmail.com (fife.sendmail.com [209.246.26.50]) by ladle.sendmail.com (Switch-3.3.1/Sentrion-3.0.0) with ESMTP id m21N0hc1021726 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:00:43 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=sendmail.com; s=ladle.dkim; t=1204412443; bh=W/Ic6rp6N9Q8OzjcOw3lVDw9nD9/BU3QFbbH QwmXeHc=; h=Received:X-DKIM:DKIM-Signature:Date:From:X-X-Sender:To: cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:User-Agent: MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-MM-Ex-RefId; b=txqzHg+MTXS3B5Np/0/COFQLjPaZKngvIB5Bcyhsxp/18COy+NCm7IHcZSAS+7cf8 pa7v05wb2HNBwnqseROJexGMB7SPdvoQxbyRvakdMkASwObFJpzHVS8HNRE2s/LQKI8 oxNLNkJMlkyACOJGP3cBmoEcTYgudHMawLpyCZk= Received: from [10.55.44.152] (75-171-163-144.hlrn.qwest.net [75.171.163.144]) (authenticated bits=0) by fife.sendmail.com (Switch-3.3.1/Switch-3.3.1) with ESMTP id m21MxOt3028421 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:00:07 -0800 X-DKIM: Sendmail DKIM Filter v2.2.2 fife.sendmail.com m21MxOt3028421 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=sendmail.com; s=fife.dkim; t=1204412411; bh=W/Ic6rp6N9Q8OzjcOw3lVDw9nD9/BU3QFbbHQ wmXeHc=; h=Date:From:X-X-Sender:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To: Message-ID:References:User-Agent:MIME-Version:Content-Type: Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-MM-Ex-RefId; b=B6ISoCSwjF+8KXjK+QkKbdh 3q8vfrVsNUKnkYT7+rz0ve/ra+skk/i8uaV4vuXlRSwPyhBHPM90UoLr5OhfTYOIDG8 iWn4Po8bo/JYGltSGMwInB68rz3FHHcXiDL3qs0l8l3Hn0rMX5PTu/5MmnPNOnkf0WG mQUORLdKzu4cOg= Date: Sat, 1 Mar 2008 15:58:45 -0700 From: Philip Guenther X-X-Sender: guenther@vanye.mho.net To: =?KOI8-R?B?5MnM0c4g8MHMwdXaz9c=?= cc: IETF Sieve WG Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: In-Reply-To: <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> Message-ID: References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (BSO 882 2007-12-20) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT X-MM-Ex-RefId: 149371::080301150010-5B8E6B90-7BD9E0F5/0-0/0-1 Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean On Sat, 1 Mar 2008, Дилян Палаузов wrote: ... > Does this mean, that a recipient cannot be rejected after RCPT TO: and before > DATA: in a multi recipient message? Yes, that's exactly what it means. > In the discussion I have not seen why this shall not be possible. Because doing so in SMTP is impossible without unstandardized extensions. (How is the server supposed to indicate that a message is being rejected for rcpt A but not rcpt B?) Philip Guenther From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Sat Mar 1 17:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205018918.20268@xexHmdhOscH54x/6T6BCMQ X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Sat, 01 Mar 2008 17:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m21NSVC3016583 for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 18:28:37 -0500 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 m21NGqw7048210 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 16:16:52 -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 m21NGqmD048209; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 16:16:52 -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 smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de (smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.62.220]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id m21NGoDI048203 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Sat, 1 Mar 2008 16:16:51 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from Dilyan.Palauzov@aegee.org) Received: from smtp.aegee.org (aegeeserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.131.80]) by smtp2.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 4.63 #1) id 1JVawi-0005AB-O7; Sun, 02 Mar 2008 00:16:48 +0100 X-Mail-Sent-By-AEGEE.org-Account: didopalauzov Received: from [129.13.226.3] (vpnwwwext.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.72.177]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.aegee.org (8.14.2/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m21NGnYC013935 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 1 Mar 2008 23:16:49 GMT Message-ID: <47C9E3E5.50007@aegee.org> Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 00:16:53 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Philip Guenther CC: IETF Sieve WG Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6074/Sat Mar 1 21:59:36 2008 on AEGEEserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Hello, >> Does this mean, that a recipient cannot be rejected after RCPT TO: and >> before DATA: in a multi recipient message? > > Yes, that's exactly what it means. > >> In the discussion I have not seen why this shall not be possible. > > Because doing so in SMTP is impossible without unstandardized > extensions. (How is the server supposed to indicate that a message is > being rejected for rcpt A but not rcpt B?) MAIL FROM: 250 OK RCPT TO: 250 OK RCPT TO: 550-You are not permitted to post to mailing-list@example.com from 550 your me@example.org address. RCPT TO: 250 OK DATA ... Why shouldn't be a sieve script allowed to set the 550-response here? Със здраве, Дилян From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Sun Mar 2 07:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205070000.04032@HGo7oEr7qIFSUSNsJmZKxQ X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Sun, 02 Mar 2008 07:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m22Ddsjv023000 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 08:39:59 -0500 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 m22DRPl2008120 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 2 Mar 2008 06:27:25 -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 m22DRPua008119; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 06:27:25 -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 m22DRNd4008111 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 06:27:24 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no) Received: from kalyani.oryx.com (localhost.oryx.com [127.0.0.1]) by kalyani.oryx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D80674AC5B for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 14:27:22 +0100 (CET) Received: from 195.30.37.9 (HELO libertango.oryx.com) by kalyani.oryx.com with esmtp id 1204464442-96135-1165; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 14:27:22 +0100 Message-Id: <7x419vzFouK8NNfReWb/cg.md5@libertango.oryx.com> Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2008 14:27:22 +0100 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Philip Guenther writes: > Because doing so in SMTP is impossible without unstandardized > extensions. (How is the server supposed to indicate that a message is > being rejected for rcpt A but not rcpt B?) MAIL FROM: 250 OK RCPT TO: if envelope :all :is "from" "tim@example.com" { reject; } 550 I reject mail from tim@example.com Arnt From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Sun Mar 2 18:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205110461.73989@1AnNohYhk7NwhHRkpurGjQ X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Sun, 02 Mar 2008 18:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m230sEZu011642 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 19:54:19 -0500 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 m230g0xF060097 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sun, 2 Mar 2008 17:42:01 -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 m230g0dd060096; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 17:42:00 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id m230fwVx060084 for ; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 17:41:59 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MRYB6HQKTS000UHV@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Sun, 2 Mar 2008 16:41:56 -0800 (PST) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MRXXGQJTK0000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com>; Sun, 02 Mar 2008 16:41:49 -0800 (PST) Cc: IETF Sieve WG Message-id: <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Sun, 02 Mar 2008 15:52:17 -0800 (PST) From: Ned Freed Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: In-reply-to: "Your message dated Sat, 01 Mar 2008 19:14:21 +0100" <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> To: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1204504914; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=VY3smHcvJL8lFBTdN2swc81Kf eCZMsOGLYWQ+A1K6xwMFW2h9izgz7QD/l8qqLfx2hn5hgumbAETbdFit+wtkA== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean > Hello, > I read the discussion from Juli 2007 about the reject concerns. There > is still something that is not addressed in > draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 -- early evaluation of scripts. Of course it s possible to, say, evaluate a script that only uses envelope "from" tests at the MAIL FROM stage, or to evaluate a script that only uses envelope tests at the RCPT TO stage, but I really have to question the utility of an extended discussions of the issues surrounding using sieve this way. The overwhelming majority of scripts we end up with in practice make extensive use of header and other tests that depend on message content and henace cannot be evaluated until after the DATA phase. And while the reject action is almost certainly the case where early evaluation offers the most advantage, it isn't the only test or action where early evaluation brings up issues, some of them fairly subtle. Consider spamtest - it is possible in many cases to compute a spam score based solely on envelope information. But better results are usually produced if content is considered. So how should this be handled? Should require ["spamtest", "reject, "relational", "comparator-i;ascii-numeric"]; if spamtest :value "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" "3" { reject "Keep your spam"; } be evaluated at RCPT TO when possible, or should it have to wait until after DATA because a better score is available then, or perhaps it should be evaluated twice? And all this totally ignores the implementation issues with actually using exist spam filtering software with only an envelope. Now, has the issue of early evaluation been one described in the sieve base specification and given due considerstion in all the other sieve documents (the currentdate test defined in date-index is an obvious example of a place where such considerations should be described), not only would I have no problem with adding such a discussion to this document, I would have insisted on it. But that's not now things are. We haven't dealt with this concept at all and IMO trying t do so as s side note in this one extension is not a good idea. If early evaluation is indeed of sufficient interest to warrant specification then the way to handle it at ths point is with an additional informational specification. But as I stated previously, I am dubious that's there's sufficient operational utility here to bother. Ned From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Mon Mar 3 01:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205137588.78154@OvR/MBAFTRhCjZ8dsFlh3Q X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Mon, 03 Mar 2008 01:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m238QMab010434 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 03:26:27 -0500 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 m238Dlsw098223 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 01:13:47 -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 m238Dl42098222; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 01:13:47 -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 m238DkpI098214 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 01:13:46 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no) Received: from kalyani.oryx.com (localhost.oryx.com [127.0.0.1]) by kalyani.oryx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AD2974AC50; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:13:44 +0100 (CET) Received: from 195.30.37.9 (HELO libertango.oryx.com) by kalyani.oryx.com with esmtp id 1204532024-96135-1345; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:13:44 +0100 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:13:44 +0100 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: Cc: Ned Freed , =?KOI8-R?b?5MnM0c4g8MHMwdXaz9c=?= References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> In-Reply-To: <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean FWIW: My sieve interpreter does exactly what we're (not) allowing: I fetch the sieve script as part of verifying that the rcpt to address exists, and evaluate until some test fails for lack of data. I think the draft as it stands is fine. Arnt From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Mon Mar 3 08:27:04 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205161942.42589@95gTeOE4TeQYkP/XqU5HFg X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Mon, 03 Mar 2008 08:27:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m23FCFDv020559 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 10:12:21 -0500 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 m23EvtZA037768 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:57:55 -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 m23EvtGd037767; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:57:55 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id m23Evroc037761 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 07:57:54 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MRZ52N9BNK000VGC@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 06:57:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MRXXGQJTK0000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com>; Mon, 03 Mar 2008 06:57:43 -0800 (PST) Cc: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org, Ned Freed , =?KOI8-R?b?5MnM0c4g8MHMwdXaz9c=?= Message-id: <01MRZ52JMY3C000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 06:54:19 -0800 (PST) From: Ned Freed Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: In-reply-to: "Your message dated Mon, 03 Mar 2008 09:13:44 +0100" References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> To: Arnt Gulbrandsen DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1204556269; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=pnqzVT2SyaBQ4FgNvV/cjn/YC lq2J29AoLVfMEFc0SDvhg1i6JWSM9uXJ2rjMzvXSGc6Lca0kffXEMId/1CSZw== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean > FWIW: My sieve interpreter does exactly what we're (not) allowing: AFAIK nobodhy is talking about not allowing this. The question is whether or not we should specify all of the nuances involved in supporting this mode of operation, and if we're going to whether or not this is the right place to do it. I remain to be convinced of the need to specify this and I'm opposed to doing it in this document. > I > fetch the sieve script as part of verifying that the rcpt to address > exists, and evaluate until some test fails for lack of data. I think > the draft as it stands is fine. Our implementation doesn't work this way but nevertheless allows some types of Sieves to be evaluated at RCPT TO or even MAIL FROM time. Ned From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Mon Mar 3 09:27:04 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205165289.21981@2oJPykPH7HQ8oAUaNQNVeQ X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Mon, 03 Mar 2008 09:27:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m23G82X5031380 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 11:08:08 -0500 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 m23FsWOE041621 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:54:32 -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 m23FsWsD041620; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:54:32 -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 smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de (smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.60.220]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id m23FsTp9041603 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 08:54:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from Dilyan.Palauzov@aegee.org) Received: from smtp.aegee.org (aegeeserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.131.80]) by smtp1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 4.63 #1) id 1JWCzj-0005Qf-S5; Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:54:27 +0100 X-Mail-Sent-By-AEGEE.org-Account: didopalauzov Received: from [192.168.1.14] (d83-181-67-131.cust.tele2.de [83.181.67.131]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.aegee.org (8.14.2/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m23FsV3C003595 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 15:54:33 GMT Message-ID: <47CC1F32.8000608@aegee.org> Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:54:26 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ned Freed CC: Arnt Gulbrandsen , ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <01MRZ52JMY3C000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> In-Reply-To: <01MRZ52JMY3C000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6093/Mon Mar 3 15:03:18 2008 on AEGEEserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Hello, I think draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 implicitly forbids sending 550 after RCPT. In Section 2.1 (Action ereject) the SMTP 550 way is shifted to Section 2.1.1 (Rejecting a message at the SMTP/LMTP protocol level) and Section 2.1.1 shifts the problem to Section 2.1.2 (Rejecting a message by sending a DSN). Or may be I am wrong? About the spamtest issue: it shall be evaluated after data. If I remember correctly, there was an idea to extend the envelope test to check against the sending host (apart from sender and recipient) and check using external lists if the sending host is blacklisted. Then the mail can be rejected according to the user's preferences and not due the site policy. Can we leave for now spamtest out the discussion? The idea of the early evaluation in multi-recipient messages is to reduce the amount of generated NDRs, when some of the recipients are mailboxes (accept spam) and others are mailing lists (who do not want to discard messages from non list members, ignoring the spaminess). The problem with NDRs is that they might end in a spamtrap/honeypot and blacklist your server. With early evaluation all this is avoided... And once again: does draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 forbid this behaviour? > FWIW: My sieve interpreter does exactly what we're (not) allowing: I > fetch the sieve script as part of verifying that the rcpt to address > exists, and evaluate until some test fails for lack of data. I think > the draft as it stands is fine. I think this is wrong, as it does not allow combining keep and reject. The reject action shall be executed after RCPT TO:, if the script terminated successfully (= reached or stop; without making header/body tests, or invoking the keep action) being executed there. Със здраве, Дилян From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Mon Mar 3 10:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205168555.0012@bvEorG0aPLgyTha49zm6Lw X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Mon, 03 Mar 2008 10:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m23H2P0M008573 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 12:02:30 -0500 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 m23GmLqP046117 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:48:21 -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 m23GmLwj046113; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:48:21 -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 m23GmKIR046105 for ; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 09:48:20 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no) Received: from kalyani.oryx.com (localhost.oryx.com [127.0.0.1]) by kalyani.oryx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7C2184AC6D; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 17:48:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from 195.30.37.9 (HELO libertango.oryx.com) by kalyani.oryx.com with esmtp id 1204562899-96135-1539; Mon, 3 Mar 2008 17:48:19 +0100 Message-Id: Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2008 17:48:18 +0100 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: Cc: Ned Freed , =?KOI8-R?b?5MnM0c4g8MHMwdXaz9c=?= References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <01MRZ52JMY3C000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <47CC1F32.8000608@aegee.org> In-Reply-To: <47CC1F32.8000608@aegee.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=koi8-r; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by balder-227.proper.com id m23GmLIR046106 Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean writes: > I think this is wrong, as it does not allow combining keep and reject. In my code, keep (even implicit keep) is a command which cannot complete at RCPT TO time for lack of data. So it works. I agree with Ned that going into this level of detail in the document is not helpful. This is a very minor point, and spending text on it will help very few of the document's readers. For most readers it's just a weird digression, and digressions are not good. Arnt From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Tue Mar 4 10:27:09 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.5 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205254454.83793@TLpIV8ZGK5MhpmcfhSbh9w X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Tue, 04 Mar 2008 10:27:09 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m24Gs97l011896 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 11:54:14 -0500 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 m24GXiqq081469 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:33:44 -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 m24GXicX081468; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:33:44 -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 ladle.sendmail.com (ladle.sendmail.com [209.246.26.53]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.13.5/8.13.5) with ESMTP id m24GXgJQ081460 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL) for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:33:44 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from guenther+mtafilters@sendmail.com) Received: from fife.sendmail.com (fife.sendmail.com [209.246.26.50]) by ladle.sendmail.com (Switch-3.3.1/Sentrion-3.0.0) with ESMTP id m24GYftH021453 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:34:41 -0800 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=sendmail.com; s=ladle.dkim; t=1204648481; bh=q2gIx/fDuSolX+CkeXuHZONCkDKKDKK4anoH NxV3ROM=; h=Received:Received:Date:From:X-X-Sender:To:cc:Subject: In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:User-Agent:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=swTklUmPTJ1DtWW2J/o77r/N smm9Y3xMai+6IFiLT6k44fxVUxiM9cG1eYRTmADjC0aVMKgcGN0gJjFJb7xbXlwB16+ VxP3DMsNkv2ba+Aan7bTwlcZS/f+u0XM1cdwvRTtAdDnSCsKGBZP9IXqeNByu2mO+Cx s2TQ+jemg9Yvo= Received: from localhost.localdomain (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fife.sendmail.com (Switch-3.3.1/Switch-3.3.1) with ESMTP id m24GXtn4029138; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:34:09 -0800 Received: from [192.168.0.2] ([adsl-64-58-1-252.mho.net [64.58.1.252] (may be forged)]) by fife.sendmail.com with LMTP id m24GY2IK029318 ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 08:34:08 -0800 Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 09:33:25 -0700 From: Philip Guenther X-X-Sender: guenther@vanye.mho.net To: =?KOI8-R?B?5MnM0c4g8MHMwdXaz9c=?= cc: Philip Guenther , IETF Sieve WG Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: In-Reply-To: <47C9E3E5.50007@aegee.org> Message-ID: References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <47C9E3E5.50007@aegee.org> User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (BSO 882 2007-12-20) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean On Sun, 2 Mar 2008, Дилян Палаузов wrote: >>> Does this mean, that a recipient cannot be rejected after RCPT TO: and >>> before DATA: in a multi recipient message? >> >> Yes, that's exactly what it means. My apologies for my unclear statement. The above was in relation to this text from the draft: Note that if a message is arriving over SMTP and has multiple recipients, some of whom have accepted the message, Section 2.1.2 defines how to reject such a message. In light of the quote, I interpreted the "after RCPT" in your question as meaning "after being accepted at RCPT time". That is, I thought you were asking if it was possible to perform individual rejection of recipients that were accepted at RCPT time. As for your actual question: IMO, the possibility of rejecting individual recipients by rejecting their RCPT commands is permitted by the draft. Philip Guenther From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Tue Mar 4 16:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205275139.27749@aCGHGmG/Pk2iUqpXfsZ07Q X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Tue, 04 Mar 2008 16:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m24Mcpc2001447 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 17:38:57 -0500 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m24MM7UL027915 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 15:22:07 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m24MM7vb027914; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 15:22:07 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m24MM3XK027904 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 15:22:04 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MS0YVN82740010SZ@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:21:59 -0800 (PST) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MS0R231C6800005Q@mauve.mrochek.com>; Tue, 04 Mar 2008 14:21:53 -0800 (PST) Cc: Ned Freed , Arnt Gulbrandsen , ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Message-id: <01MS0YVKZMWI00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 13:53:43 -0800 (PST) From: Ned Freed Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: In-reply-to: "Your message dated Mon, 03 Mar 2008 16:54:26 +0100" <47CC1F32.8000608@aegee.org> References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <01MRZ52JMY3C000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <47CC1F32.8000608@aegee.org> To: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1204669318; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=Qw6/bANAQKMVpd7URnSOOoo/b UcMR9cI5CntMVEY+Rki4PV7H+EbJ1lRfShmpG58DvZsis0lcUVZJRp19iApjA== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean > Hello, > I think draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 implicitly forbids sending > 550 after RCPT. In Section 2.1 (Action ereject) the SMTP 550 way is > shifted to Section 2.1.1 (Rejecting a message at the SMTP/LMTP protocol > level) and Section 2.1.1 shifts the problem to Section 2.1.2 (Rejecting > a message by sending a DSN). Or may be I am wrong? I'm sorry, but you are quite simply wrong about this. First, just because something isn't discussed doesn't mean it is disalllowed. And section 2.1.2 is quite clear in stating that it applies to rejections occuring after message data has been received. That's the only sensible interpretation the phrase "may receive a message via SMTP" can possibly have. And the text goes on to talk about the fact that this restriction doesn't apply to LMTP because LMTP has per-recipient replies after DATA, which only makes sense if we're talking about responses after message data has been transfererd. Now, while I think the current text is already quite clear, in order to forestall further argument I suggest changing the first paragraph of section 2.1.2 to read: An implementation may need to respond to the transfer of message data when more than one RCPT TO has been accepted by the server, and at least one recipient but not all of are refusing delivery (whether the refusal is caused by a Sieve "ereject" action or for some other reason). In this case, the server MUST accept the message and generate DSNs for all recipients that refused delivery. Note that this exception does not apply to LMTP, as LMTP is able to reject messages on a per-recipient basis after message data has been transferred. > About the spamtest issue: it shall be evaluated after data. Why? What if the necessary information is already available and nothing in the message body is capable of overriding it? Why would a ban on early evaluation of scripts that use spamtest make any more sense than a ban on early evalaution of scripts that use reject? > If I > remember correctly, there was an idea to extend the envelope test to > check against the sending host (apart from sender and recipient) and > check using external lists if the sending host is blacklisted. However, no such extension has been defined or even, aside from a passing mention, discussed. > Then the > mail can be rejected according to the user's preferences and not due the > site policy. Can we leave for now spamtest out the discussion? Not if what we're talking about is explicit adding text discussing early evaluation of sieve scripts. In that case I insist that the discussion encompass the effects of early evaluation on every test and action we have defined so far. When it comes to implementation methods we either have to discuss a given approach thoroughly or not at all. > The idea of the early evaluation in multi-recipient messages is to > reduce the amount of generated NDRs, when some of the recipients are > mailboxes (accept spam) and others are mailing lists (who do not want to > discard messages from non list members, ignoring the spaminess). The > problem with NDRs is that they might end in a spamtrap/honeypot and > blacklist your server. With early evaluation all this is avoided... We're all well aware of these issues. > And > once again: does draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06 forbid this behaviour? No. > > FWIW: My sieve interpreter does exactly what we're (not) allowing: I > > fetch the sieve script as part of verifying that the rcpt to address > > exists, and evaluate until some test fails for lack of data. I think > > the draft as it stands is fine. > I think this is wrong, as it does not allow combining keep and reject. I fail to see anything in this implementation description that would create a problem for combining keep and reject. And even if it did, since the draft strongly recommends implementations to forbid this combination (our implementation definitely does this), I fail to see the point of any of this. > The reject action shall be executed after RCPT TO:, if the script > terminated successfully (= reached or stop; without making > header/body tests, or invoking the keep action) being executed there. This goes much too far - it actually recommends if not requires implementations implement early evaluation - and I am adamantly opposed to it. Ned From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Tue Mar 4 17:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,MISSING_HEADERS autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205278480.77094@JfVkiFVKBZTHLGmWFKtt+Q X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Tue, 04 Mar 2008 17:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m24NYWlq008209 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 18:34:37 -0500 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m24NHHPD031999 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:17:18 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m24NHH1u031998; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:17:17 -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 smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de (smtp.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.60.220]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m24NHFPJ031992 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 16:17:17 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from Dilyan.Palauzov@aegee.org) Received: from smtp.aegee.org (aegeeserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de [129.13.131.80]) by smtp1.rz.uni-karlsruhe.de with esmtp (Exim 4.63 #1) id 1JWgNm-0003cV-EX; Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:17:14 +0100 X-Mail-Sent-By-AEGEE.org-Account: didopalauzov Received: from [192.168.1.16] (d83-181-86-228.cust.tele2.de [83.181.86.228]) (authenticated bits=0) by smtp.aegee.org (8.14.2/8.13.6) with ESMTP id m24NHEZE021539 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 23:17:15 GMT Message-ID: <47CDD879.4030108@aegee.org> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:17:13 +0100 From: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) MIME-Version: 1.0 CC: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <01MRZ52JMY3C000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <47CC1F32.8000608@aegee.org> <01MS0YVKZMWI00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> In-Reply-To: <01MS0YVKZMWI00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV 0.92.1/6125/Tue Mar 4 19:01:27 2008 on AEGEEserv.aegee.uni-karlsruhe.de X-Virus-Status: Clean Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Hello, >> About the spamtest issue: it shall be evaluated after data. > > Why? What if the necessary information is already available and nothing > in the message body is capable of overriding it? Why would a ban on early > evaluation of scripts that use spamtest make any more sense than a > ban on early evaluation of scripts that use reject? Doing heuristic spam analysis can combine a lot of rules, some giving positive and other negative weight on the result. The fact that the envelope increases the spaminess, does not mean that the body of the message will not decrease it. At the end the total spaminess can be acceptable for the recipient, even if the envelope went above the limit. So to be accurate, the spamtest shall be done after DATA . In the cases when the spam software works only on the envelopes, or cannot decrease the spaminess due additional rules, then spamtest can be evaluated before DATA as well. >> If I >> remember correctly, there was an idea to extend the envelope test to >> check against the sending host (apart from sender and recipient) and >> check using external lists if the sending host is blacklisted. > > However, no such extension has been defined or even, aside from a passing > mention, discussed. Ned said on 8th October 2007 to look on draft-freed-sieve-environment-01, when it comes out, as the idea of remote-host and remote-ip will be presented there. Right now I see it is really at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-freed-sieve-environment-01. >> > FWIW: My sieve interpreter does exactly what we're (not) allowing: I >> > fetch the sieve script as part of verifying that the rcpt to address >> > exists, and evaluate until some test fails for lack of data. I think >> > the draft as it stands is fine. > >> I think this is wrong, as it does not allow combining keep and reject. > > I fail to see anything in this implementation description that would > create a > problem for combining keep and reject. And even if it did, since the draft > strongly recommends implementations to forbid this combination (our > implementation definitely does this), I fail to see the point of any of > this. If reject is done at RCPT time and there is no DATA afterwards (due the lack of accepting recipients), keep cannot be made. (Keep what?) The need of combining keep and reject was addresses in the discussion from 2006-07-11 as a sort of logging the process. >> The reject action shall be executed after RCPT TO:, if the script >> terminated successfully (= reached or stop; without making >> header/body tests, or invoking the keep action) being executed there. > > This goes much too far - it actually recommends if not requires > implementations > implement early evaluation - and I am adamantly opposed to it. This is my view on Arnt's FWIW: Arnt said that reject is executed, if no test or actions failed before reaching "reject". I answered, that this approach does not allow to combine keep and reject/fileinto and reject/notify and reject/whatever and reject. Instead, reject shall be applied during early evaluation only if the script terminates successfully. (The other option is to make reject if no actions/tests failed yet). Greetings, Dilian From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Tue Mar 4 21:27:03 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205295466.94107@mmqb9HFSUhj82kmmgkjSiA X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Tue, 04 Mar 2008 21:27:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien2.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m254HejS023323 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 23:17:46 -0500 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m252oTG2014017 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 4 Mar 2008 19:50:29 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m252oTXJ014016; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 19:50:29 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m252oSul014009 for ; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 19:50:28 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MS189ISXV4000WGV@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Tue, 4 Mar 2008 18:50:26 -0800 (PST) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MS0R231C6800005Q@mauve.mrochek.com>; Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:50:24 -0800 (PST) Cc: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Message-id: <01MS189HESCO00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2008 18:18:26 -0800 (PST) From: Ned Freed Subject: Re: action reject and smtp RCPT TO: In-reply-to: "Your message dated Wed, 05 Mar 2008 00:17:13 +0100" <47CDD879.4030108@aegee.org> References: <21C5556C51FE0FCA0D6008C5@ninevah.local> <01MR7P2PA4FO00004Z@mauve.mrochek.com> <47B34E7B.2070300@aegee.org> <1203006439.25161.83.camel@oslhomkje> <47C99CFD.6010208@aegee.org> <01MRYB6E206U000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <01MRZ52JMY3C000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> <47CC1F32.8000608@aegee.org> <01MS0YVKZMWI00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> <47CDD879.4030108@aegee.org> To: =?UTF-8?B?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?= DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1204685426; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=uc57z1RyvL0KD755keJq69ZEr QmPjcJ4rNF9lXdk0hvjg10QchyON+t4nqgYQsutNgHEUwLRhw/7vHDlrtrdoQ== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean > Hello, > >> About the spamtest issue: it shall be evaluated after data. > > > > Why? What if the necessary information is already available and nothing > > in the message body is capable of overriding it? Why would a ban on early > > evaluation of scripts that use spamtest make any more sense than a > > ban on early evaluation of scripts that use reject? > Doing heuristic spam analysis can combine a lot of rules, some giving > positive and other negative weight on the result. The fact that the > envelope increases the spaminess, does not mean that the body of the > message will not decrease it. At the end the total spaminess can be > acceptable for the recipient, even if the envelope went above the limit. > So to be accurate, the spamtest shall be done after DATA . Sigh. All of this is completely obvious and completely irrelevant. For the third time, there can be cases where the analysis done on the envelope is sufficient and no, repeat NO, analysis of the message content is capable of overriding. In such cases the message might as well be refused at the envelope stage and making some arbitrary rule saying this mustn't be done is every bit as inappropriate as the rule against doing envelope time rejects you're arguing against (despite the fact that no such rule exists). > In the cases when the spam software works only on the envelopes, or > cannot decrease the spaminess due additional rules, then spamtest can be > evaluated before DATA as well. Which is exactly what I've been saying from the start. > >> If I > >> remember correctly, there was an idea to extend the envelope test to > >> check against the sending host (apart from sender and recipient) and > >> check using external lists if the sending host is blacklisted. > > However, no such extension has been defined or even, aside from a passing > > mention, discussed. > Ned said on 8th October 2007 to look on > draft-freed-sieve-environment-01, when it comes out, as the idea of > remote-host and remote-ip will be presented there. Right now I see it is > really at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-freed-sieve-environment-01. Correct, but the environment extension gives you access to the necessary information but doesn't do the whitelist/blacklist part, which necessary for this to gain any sort of equivalency with spamtest. I actually favor the more general approach described in the (now expired) draft-melnikov-sieve-external-lists-01.txt, modulo a few changes I suggested on the list some time back. This provides a generic external list access mechanism which can be usedd for all sorts of different purposes. However, now that you have brought up environment, its another extension that potentially interacts with early evaluation in interesting ways. I hadn't really thought about it before and the initial set of environment items doesn't include anything that depends on message content (nor do any of the exxtensions we''re planning on implementing), but it is not beyond the realm of possibility that some environment item might be defined that could not be evaluated at RCPT TO time. > >> > FWIW: My sieve interpreter does exactly what we're (not) allowing: I > >> > fetch the sieve script as part of verifying that the rcpt to address > >> > exists, and evaluate until some test fails for lack of data. I think > >> > the draft as it stands is fine. > > > >> I think this is wrong, as it does not allow combining keep and reject. > > > > I fail to see anything in this implementation description that would > > create a > > problem for combining keep and reject. And even if it did, since the draft > > strongly recommends implementations to forbid this combination (our > > implementation definitely does this), I fail to see the point of any of > > this. > If reject is done at RCPT time and there is no DATA afterwards (due the > lack of accepting recipients), keep cannot be made. (Keep what?) > The need of combining keep and reject was addresses in the discussion > from 2006-07-11 as a sort of logging the process. Yes, I recall the discussion. I still think its a totally bogus thing to do and the draft still recommends that they be incompatible. > >> The reject action shall be executed after RCPT TO:, if the script > >> terminated successfully (= reached or stop; without making > >> header/body tests, or invoking the keep action) being executed there. > > > > This goes much too far - it actually recommends if not requires > > implementations > > implement early evaluation - and I am adamantly opposed to it. > This is my view on Arnt's FWIW: Arnt said that reject is executed, if no > test or actions failed before reaching "reject". I answered, that this > approach does not allow to combine keep and reject/fileinto and > reject/notify and reject/whatever and reject. Instead, reject shall be > applied during early evaluation only if the script terminates > successfully. (The other option is to make reject if no actions/tests > failed yet). OK, got it. Arnt has already clarified that this is in fact a nonissue for him. It is for us as well - we don't stop evaluating at reject or anything else for that matter besides stop or an error of some sort. Ned From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Fri Mar 7 14:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.5 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50 autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205529314.53374@1hrfmJoIfB1Dg4esbwV0Gg X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Fri, 07 Mar 2008 14:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m27LF6v2016758 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 16:15:11 -0500 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m27KwABH003438 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Mar 2008 13:58:10 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m27KwA4H003437; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 13:58:10 -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 rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m27Kw9pQ003428 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 13:58:10 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from alexey.melnikov@isode.com) Received: from [192.168.0.7] ((unknown) [62.3.217.253]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 19:10:08 +0000 X-SMTP-Protocol-Errors: NORDNS Message-ID: <47D192DC.6070000@isode.com> Date: Fri, 07 Mar 2008 19:09:16 +0000 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: MTA filtering mailing list Subject: Final sanity check on draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop-04.txt MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Cyrus and Tony have updated Sieve MIME loops document. Cyrus should send out a message (I apologize if he did already and I missed it) about which changes were addressed and which were not (and why). I would like to ask all people who commented on the document earlier to review if their comments were addressed. If there are no comments on the document before March 21st, I would recommend its publication. Regards, Alexey, From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Fri Mar 7 16:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.8 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_40 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205534167.9043@0DXVifH5tBk4spZDHQZPUg X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Fri, 07 Mar 2008 16:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m27MZwPd026752 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 17:36:03 -0500 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m27MHxX5012315 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:17:59 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m27MHxsi012314; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:17:59 -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 (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m27MHvhj012304 for ; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 15:17:58 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no) Received: from kalyani.oryx.com (localhost.oryx.com [127.0.0.1]) by kalyani.oryx.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57EA64AC5E; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 23:17:54 +0100 (CET) Received: from 195.30.37.9 (HELO libertango.oryx.com) by kalyani.oryx.com with esmtp id 1204928274-21199-294; Fri, 7 Mar 2008 23:17:54 +0100 Message-Id: Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 23:17:54 +0100 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: Final sanity check on draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop-04.txt Cc: Alexey Melnikov References: <47D192DC.6070000@isode.com> In-Reply-To: <47D192DC.6070000@isode.com> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean I lost track of that draft. Sorry. Three comments and a bonus. 1. for_every_part jars. We don't have file_into, we don't have any_child. I don't mind underscores per se, but I do mind heterodoxy. Using gluedtogethernames sometimes, using underscore_names sometimes and camelCaseNames sometimes makes the language unnecessarily messy. (Yes, I know we don't have camelCase anywhere. At least not that I've noticed.) 2. break has been difficult in C for decades when nested loops are used, do we need to repeat it? Wouldn't it be better to tie break and its loop explicitly, e.g. with an identifier? The identifier would be optional on the loop and mandatory on the break. 3. Perhaps I'm tired, but it wasn't clear to me whether if two loops are nested, both operate on _every_ bodypart, O(n^2) and all, or whether the inner only operates on children of the bodypart currently accessed by the outer loop. The former seems correct, but I'm not thrilled to have O(n^2) mandatory behaviour, and O(n^m) possible if more than two levels is supported. Bonus. Philosophy. I like the way :anychild without for_every_part works. That makes it possible to do parallel processing instead of sequential. If I want to process, say, ten or a hundred thousand messages with a single sieve script, that becomes important. I can transform the test to a database lookup and the query planner will generally do well. This makes some clever reprocessing of an entire mailbox possible. "Your new sieve script would have filed messages into . Do you want to move them now?". break and perhaps for_every_part torpedoes such transformations. I wonder whether that's necessary. I wonder whether it's really the same problem as the O(n^m) behaviour of nested for_every_part. Arnt From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Mon Mar 10 17:27:03 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.0 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205797580.63782@O5kVy6t69qWFu0+S8cYi7A X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Mon, 10 Mar 2008 17:27:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2ANkDHR020146 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 19:46:19 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2ANViqa008870 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:31:44 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2ANViNe008869; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:31:44 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2ANVfSn008859 for ; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:31:44 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MS9H5KHGWW001V9U@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:31:40 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MS98MH6TS000005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:31:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <01MS9H5GBL9K00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:29:21 -0700 (PDT) From: Ned Freed Subject: Updated Sieve environment draft posted To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1205191900; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=p1yLW2IU1NC4p7g7+fbBlwLTT FtafpfSuaghDQAJ3l9ktrdCl35raTUv9Jhu9JAYF3LsSzH+YjUg7puXVGvNnA== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean I just posted an update to the environment draft; it should be in the repository soon. In addition to adding a note about using "name." prefixes to group related standard items, I also rearranged the text about IANA registrations a bit to make the group (hopefully) a little more logical. Please review and if this seems OK, it's time for last call. Ned From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Tue Mar 11 16:27:03 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1205881582.81537@c2zfHdpy5CmRigQ/SeC7xw X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Tue, 11 Mar 2008 16:27:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2BN6Hf2031314 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 19:06:22 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2BMp8lo063619 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:51:08 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2BMp8Fb063618; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:51:08 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2BMp6Df063606 for ; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:51:07 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MSAU1KE0Z4001RRT@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:51:05 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MS98MH6TS000005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:51:01 -0700 (PDT) Message-id: <01MSAU1HROEO00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2008 15:41:03 -0700 (PDT) From: Ned Freed Subject: Sieve date/index extension To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1205275865; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=j1iytBwDhcxRpUwTPX/Bwn/4S GJnIEH/YQcSB8Nk7Ii4lXyLQuZPL+x+VyL3KSpKw2zTmS9Zw4IEh1ZnXG+f8g== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean This draft was (briefly) discussed at yesterday's meeting, and Phillip raised the only issue: Why the handling of a list of headers is done the way it is. More specifically, the text currently says: Both header and address allow the specification of more than one header field name. If more than one header field name is specified all the named header fields are counted in the order specified by the header-list. Phillip asked why the semantics weren't instead to look for the nth field in the order the fields appear in the header. The main reason for this is that while i see some value in being able to determin the relative order of fields in a header, the ability to find do a a limited sort of ordering check while looking for a single string and not being able to determine which field matched didn't strike me as in any way useful. And these semantics interfere with implementations like ours that use what amounts to a hash table to quickly find headers with a given name - as everyone knows, hashes are great at finding things quickly but sucky at retaining ordering information. I frankly have no idea whether or not this optimization in our implementation is important. But when you operate in the hundreds of messages a second realm at million mailbox sites and a significant number of mailboxes having very substantial sieves (hundreds of tests in a single sieve are not uncommon), it's only sensible to take any speedup you can get. So, absent a compelling use-case for changing the semantics, I'd really prefer to leave this as-is. Ned From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 06:27:04 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.7 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24 autolearn=no version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206018803.37189@hTiJkeSlMA0CPUiKTWgi1A X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 06:27:04 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DDDFpD022149 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:13:21 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DCkhga036860 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 05:46:43 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DCkhWR036859; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 05:46:43 -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 rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DCkgLK036851 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 05:46:43 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from alexey.melnikov@isode.com) Received: from [130.129.21.224] (dhcp-15e0.ietf71.ietf.org [130.129.21.224]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:46:39 +0000 Message-ID: <47D86361.2020102@isode.com> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 2008 23:12:33 +0000 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Ned Freed CC: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: Updated Sieve environment draft posted References: <01MS9H5GBL9K00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> In-Reply-To: <01MS9H5GBL9K00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean In my capacity of a technical contributor: Ned Freed wrote: > I just posted an update to the environment draft; it should be in the > repository soon. In addition to adding a note about using "name." > prefixes to group related standard items, I also rearranged the text > about IANA registrations a bit to make the group (hopefully) a little > more > logical. I've reviewed the recent changes (and I've reviewed earlier versions of the document) and I believe the document is ready for publication. In particular, I think the current list of attributes specified in the document is sufficient and is reasonably described. From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 08:27:03 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206026411.0486@cERI3H2icZ3hthVaIiiYWg X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:27:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DFJatA014664 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:19:41 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DF0Xsu051955 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:00:33 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DF0Xgj051954; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:00:33 -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 daboo.name (piper.mulberrymail.com [151.201.22.177] (may be forged)) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DF0Wf9051945 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:00:33 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from cyrus@daboo.name) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 117F23FFE79 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:00:32 -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 dHNhjpKurRgA for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:00:31 -0400 (EDT) Received: from dhcp-1790.ietf71.ietf.org (dhcp-1790.ietf71.ietf.org [130.129.23.144]) by daboo.name (Postfix) with ESMTP id 969853FFE6E for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:00:31 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:00:30 -0400 From: Cyrus Daboo To: SIEVE Subject: Proposed charter change Message-ID: 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 Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Hi folks, Below is a proposal for a new charter for the working group based on discussions at this weeks IETF meeting. Please review this and comment. We would like to see a "show of hands" from implementers on each of the new extensions being proposed so that we can judge the interest in each. Note that we will need document authors/editors to step up for items (3) and (4) if we are to include these. Once the WG has discussed this and decided on exactly what we will work on, Alexey and I will propose some milestones. I am hoping that we can complete all this work in 12 - 18 months. Note that some of the new drafts are already close to last call. This is all subject to AD and IESG approval, of course. --- The SIEVE email filtering language is specified in RFC 5228, together with a number of extensions. The SIEVE working group is being re-chartered to: (1) Finish work on existing in-progress Working Group documents: (a) Body (draft-ietf-sieve-body-07.txt) (b) Notify mailto (draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto.txt) (c) Edit header (draft-ietf-sieve-editheader-10.txt) (d) Mime loops (draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop-04.txt) (e) Refuse/reject (draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06.txt) (2) Finalize and publish the following SIEVE extensions as proposed standards: (a) Date/Index (draft-freed-sieve-date-index-08.txt) (b) iHave (draft-freed-sieve-ihave-01.txt) (c) Environment (draft-freed-sieve-environment-03.txt) (d) Notary (draft-freed-sieve-notary-01.txt) (e) SIEVE in XML (draft-freed-sieve-in-xml-01.txt) (f) Notify-sip (draft-melnikov-sieve-notify-sip-message-01.txt) (g) ManageSIEVE (draft-martin-managesieve-08.txt) (h) RegEx (draft-ietf-sieve-regex-00.txt) (j) Meta-data (draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-03.txt) (k) Include/multi-script (draft-daboo-sieve-include-05.txt) (k) Address data (draft-melnikov-sieve-external-lists-01) Additional drafts may be added to this list, but only via a charter revision. There must also be demonstrable willingness in the SIEVE development community to actually implement a given extension before it can be added to this charter. (3) Work on a "Benefits of SIEVE" guide for client and server vendors that: (a) Describes the SIEVE protocol and its suite of extensions. (b) Explains the benefits of server-side filtering in practical terms. (c) Shows how client-side filtering can be migrated to SIEVE. (4) 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. -- Cyrus Daboo From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 09:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206028965.96906@2/pAebAw/37BEO5XopmE8w X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DG2c5q024256 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:02:43 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DFoFMg058906 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:50:15 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DFoFnu058905; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:50:15 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DFoCRU058895 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:50:13 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MSD7WFSFB4002AHR@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:50:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MSD7JN0AJK000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:50:08 -0700 (PDT) Cc: SIEVE Message-id: <01MSD7WEG7I2000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 08:44:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Ned Freed Subject: Re: Proposed charter change In-reply-to: "Your message dated Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:00:30 -0400" References: To: Cyrus Daboo DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1205423410; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=ShOe5ASk031r5da+iFUtW6UAc /8I/GzYwYK4ylsHkPPfX53rvXN0lzrSdfAo3Jo534Mn5THoSaFp8mzYhftc2w== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean > We would like to see a "show of hands" from implementers on each of the new > extensions being proposed so that we can judge the interest in each. OK... > (a) Body (draft-ietf-sieve-body-07.txt) Partial implementation likely, full implementation unlikely - too expensive computationally. > (b) Notify mailto (draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto.txt) We already implement the old draft of this. An update to the current draft is planned. > (c) Edit header (draft-ietf-sieve-editheader-10.txt) Already implemented. > (d) Mime loops (draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop-04.txt) Partially implemented. Full implementation likely. > (e) Refuse/reject (draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06.txt) Already implemented. > (2) Finalize and publish the following SIEVE extensions as proposed > standards: > (a) Date/Index (draft-freed-sieve-date-index-08.txt) Already implemented. > (b) iHave (draft-freed-sieve-ihave-01.txt) Already implemented. > (c) Environment (draft-freed-sieve-environment-03.txt) Already implemented. > (d) Notary (draft-freed-sieve-notary-01.txt) Will be implemented once specification is completed. > (e) SIEVE in XML (draft-freed-sieve-in-xml-01.txt) Already implemented. > (f) Notify-sip (draft-melnikov-sieve-notify-sip-message-01.txt) Unlikely to implement. > (g) ManageSIEVE (draft-martin-managesieve-08.txt) Implementation in progress. > (h) RegEx (draft-ietf-sieve-regex-00.txt) Already implemented, but will probably need i18n work. > (j) Meta-data (draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-03.txt) Under investigation. > (k) Include/multi-script (draft-daboo-sieve-include-05.txt) We use the multiple script approach instead and this doesn't reallly fit our storage model. Unlikely to implement but this may change depending on how the draft progresses. > (k) Address data (draft-melnikov-sieve-external-lists-01) Not implemented yet but next on the to-do list. Ned From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 10:27:03 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206030696.42736@w0v7BsjphX81On5uDpUrUg X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:27:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DGVRvw030904 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:31:32 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DGGV1p061382 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:16:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DGGVDM061381; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:16:31 -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 mail.rockliffe.com (mail.rockliffe.com [216.34.131.10]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DGGSMm061366 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:16:31 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from Nigel.Swinson@mailsite.com) Received: from nigel (nigel.rockliffe.com [10.42.44.110]) by mail.rockliffe.com (Rockliffe SMTPRA 8.0.4) with ESMTP id ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:16:27 -0700 Message-ID: <001201c88525$970265a0$6e2c2a0a@rockliffe.com> From: "Nigel Swinson" To: "Cyrus Daboo" Cc: "SIEVE" References: Subject: Re: Proposed charter change Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:16:25 -0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; reply-type=response Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3198 Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean > (1) Finish work on existing in-progress Working Group documents: > > (a) Body (draft-ietf-sieve-body-07.txt) yes > (b) Notify mailto (draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto.txt) no plan > (c) Edit header (draft-ietf-sieve-editheader-10.txt) yes > (d) Mime loops (draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop-04.txt) yes > (e) Refuse/reject (draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06.txt) ish > (2) Finalize and publish the following SIEVE extensions as proposed > standards: > > (a) Date/Index (draft-freed-sieve-date-index-08.txt) no plan > (b) iHave (draft-freed-sieve-ihave-01.txt) no plan > (c) Environment (draft-freed-sieve-environment-03.txt) no plan > (d) Notary (draft-freed-sieve-notary-01.txt) no plan > (e) SIEVE in XML (draft-freed-sieve-in-xml-01.txt) no plan > (f) Notify-sip (draft-melnikov-sieve-notify-sip-message-01.txt) no plan > (g) ManageSIEVE (draft-martin-managesieve-08.txt) no plan > (h) RegEx (draft-ietf-sieve-regex-00.txt) ish > (j) Meta-data (draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-03.txt) no plan > (k) Include/multi-script (draft-daboo-sieve-include-05.txt) no plan > (k) Address data (draft-melnikov-sieve-external-lists-01) ish Cheers Nigel From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 10:27:05 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206032866.53076@TRRoCpYKj701PrtKH0UE2Q X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:27:05 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DH7e6Y005623 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:07:46 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DGqinq064994 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:52:44 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DGqiWb064993; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:52:44 -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 rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DGqhE9064987 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:52:44 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from alexey.melnikov@isode.com) Received: from [130.129.21.224] (dhcp-15e0.ietf71.ietf.org [130.129.21.224]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:52:42 +0000 Message-ID: <47D95BD5.2050606@isode.com> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:52:37 +0000 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: Cyrus Daboo CC: SIEVE Subject: Re: Proposed charter change References: In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Speaking as an implementor: Cyrus Daboo wrote: > (1) Finish work on existing in-progress Working Group documents: > > (a) Body (draft-ietf-sieve-body-07.txt) Will implement. > (b) Notify mailto (draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto.txt) Undecided, but will consider implementing > (c) Edit header (draft-ietf-sieve-editheader-10.txt) Will implement > (d) Mime loops (draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop-04.txt) Will implement > (e) Refuse/reject (draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06.txt) Older version already implemented. > (2) Finalize and publish the following SIEVE extensions as proposed > standards: > > (a) Date/Index (draft-freed-sieve-date-index-08.txt) Will implement > (b) iHave (draft-freed-sieve-ihave-01.txt) This looks very interesting, but I haven't even started thinking about how difficult this would be to implement. > (c) Environment (draft-freed-sieve-environment-03.txt) Will implement > (d) Notary (draft-freed-sieve-notary-01.txt) Will implement > (e) SIEVE in XML (draft-freed-sieve-in-xml-01.txt) This looks interesting, even though there is no immediate plan to implement. > (f) Notify-sip (draft-melnikov-sieve-notify-sip-message-01.txt) I haven't thought about implementing this yet. > (g) ManageSIEVE (draft-martin-managesieve-08.txt) Implemented. > (h) RegEx (draft-ietf-sieve-regex-00.txt) I am not sure this will be implemented, no customer requirements so far. > (j) Meta-data (draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-03.txt) Will implement. > (k) Include/multi-script (draft-daboo-sieve-include-05.txt) I've started implementing something like multiscript and will be looking at include. So this looks interesting to me. > (k) Address data (draft-melnikov-sieve-external-lists-01) Will implement. > (4) 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. I will definitely participate in this effort, but I can't commit to be an editor. From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 10:27:06 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206033199.07655@PzYanhScWMmmJtSbWdZKig X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 10:27:06 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DHDCXD007001 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 13:13:17 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DGx9mL065523 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:59:09 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DGx9cc065522; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:59:09 -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 shell.mv.net (osmium.mv.net [199.125.85.152]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id m2DGx8PV065515 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 09:59:09 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from mem@mv.mv.com) Received: (qmail 35565 invoked by uid 101); 13 Mar 2008 12:59:08 -0400 From: "Mark E. Mallett" Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:59:07 -0400 To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: Updated Sieve environment draft posted Message-ID: <20080313165907.GA28015@osmium.mv.net> References: <01MS9H5GBL9K00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <01MS9H5GBL9K00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 04:29:21PM -0700, Ned Freed wrote: > > I just posted an update to the environment draft; it should be in the > repository soon. Seems short and sweet. > In addition to adding a note about using "name." > prefixes to group related standard items, That note is actually the only thing that gave me pause. When I read: > Extensions designed for interoperable use SHOULD be defined in > standards track or experimental RFCs. Groups of standardized items > MAY choose to use a common name prefix of the form "name.". it took me a few passes to realize that this was not recommending the literal prefix string "name." (perhaps relating to the "name" environment item) but recommending grouping related items by some prefix "xxx." where "xxx" is replaced by some mnemonic for the category by which they are related. I dunno if that's even worth mentioning, but there it is, mentioned. A couple of other musings, again perhaps not worth mentioning, but while I'm here: There is a "host" item listed, which is the FQDN of the local host. It seems to me that one might want to know the host-only part of that string. One could obtain it in a round-about way by using the "domain" environment item and the "host" item; but is it worth adding "host-only" ? I also think that the draft could benefit by providing for some behavior in the presence of the "variables" extension, e.g. by defining a namespace such as "env." and stating what value is returned if the item is undefined in the implementation. I realize that one could obtain the values by using :matches, wildcarding, and variable assignments; having namespace support would be more straightforward. That's all.. mm From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 12:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206037905.51813@MMaGdnsE71bcv22xysd2AQ X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DIVaNO022499 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:31:42 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DIHHhI073142 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:17:17 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DIHHZY073141; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:17:17 -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 shell.mv.net (osmium.mv.net [199.125.85.152]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with SMTP id m2DIHGAq073135 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 11:17:17 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from mem@mv.mv.com) Received: (qmail 63299 invoked by uid 101); 13 Mar 2008 14:17:16 -0400 From: "Mark E. Mallett" Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 14:17:16 -0400 To: SIEVE Subject: Re: Proposed charter change Message-ID: <20080313181716.GA44069@osmium.mv.net> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.1i Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 11:00:30AM -0400, Cyrus Daboo wrote: > > We would like to see a "show of hands" from implementers on each of the new > extensions being proposed so that we can judge the interest in each. ... > (a) Body (draft-ietf-sieve-body-07.txt) not yet, might implement some of it. But enough of it doesn't match my worldview (or perhaps my code's worldview) that implementing all of it will be problematic. > (b) Notify mailto (draft-ietf-sieve-notify-mailto.txt) not yet, probably will > (c) Edit header (draft-ietf-sieve-editheader-10.txt) have implemented an older draft, need to validate against this one. Also still have "replaceheader" and probably won't remove it. > (d) Mime loops (draft-ietf-sieve-mime-loop-04.txt) possibly, but again with the worldview issues (as noted on-list in past) > (e) Refuse/reject (draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-06.txt) intend to, at which point I'll find out about any problems I guess. > (a) Date/Index (draft-freed-sieve-date-index-08.txt) intend to. > (b) iHave (draft-freed-sieve-ihave-01.txt) will implement, looks very nice. > (c) Environment (draft-freed-sieve-environment-03.txt) will implement. > (d) Notary (draft-freed-sieve-notary-01.txt) > (e) SIEVE in XML (draft-freed-sieve-in-xml-01.txt) > (f) Notify-sip (draft-melnikov-sieve-notify-sip-message-01.txt) I confess that I haven't looked at these close enough. > (g) ManageSIEVE (draft-martin-managesieve-08.txt) is in the queue, but low priority. > (h) RegEx (draft-ietf-sieve-regex-00.txt) had not seen this one, but have implemented against draft-murchison-sieve-regex-08.txt . (I have also implemented the quoteregex function, but in a different way; I'll probably add this style as well.) I think regex draft could benefit with some enhancements (such as alternate regex expression methods). hmm, no (i) ? > (j) Meta-data (draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-03.txt) am unaware of this > (k) Include/multi-script (draft-daboo-sieve-include-05.txt) I'm not happy with the kind of include this specifies, so probably won't implement it (and already have other include mechanism). > (k) Address data (draft-melnikov-sieve-external-lists-01) [oh, that's what happened to (i) :) ] Will probably implement at least a subset of this - probably limited to the opaque identifier form, as I'm not too keen on implementing URL-following. Unless I'm misreading the intent of that. mm From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 16:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206054841.72982@C8Y1x7F0Pm7hdcuw1bdy3w X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DNDt58021863 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:14:00 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DMvjlf098665 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:57:45 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DMvjAx098664; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:57:45 -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 mail.ietf.org (mail.ietf.org [IPv6:2001:1890:1112:1::20]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DMviJJ098650 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 15:57:45 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from root@core3.amsl.com) Received: by core3.amsl.com (Postfix, from userid 0) id 5071228C2AA; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:00:00 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: Multipart/Mixed; Boundary="NextPart" Mime-Version: 1.0 To: i-d-announce@ietf.org Cc: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org From: Internet-Drafts@ietf.org Message-Id: <20080313230001.5071228C2AA@core3.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:00:01 -0700 (PDT) Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be infected Subject: {Blocked Content} I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-body-08.txt --NextPart Warning: This message has had one or more attachments removed Warning: (not named). Warning: Please read the "mallorn-Attachment-Warning.txt" attachment(s) for more information. A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories. This draft is a work item of the Sieve Mail Filtering Language Working Group of the IETF. Title : Sieve Email Filtering: Body Extension Author(s) : P. Guenther, J. Degener Filename : draft-ietf-sieve-body-08.txt Pages : 13 Date : 2008-3-13 This document defines a new command for the "Sieve" email filtering language that tests for the occurrence of one or more strings in the body of an email message. A URL for this Internet-Draft is: http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sieve-body-08.txt Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP at: ftp://ftp.ietf.org/internet-drafts/ Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the Internet-Draft. --NextPart Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; name="mallorn-Attachment-Warning.txt" Content-Disposition: inline; filename="mallorn-Attachment-Warning.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable This is a message from the MailScanner E-Mail Virus Protection Service ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The original e-mail attachment "not named" was believed to be infected by a virus and has been replaced by this warning message. If you wish to receive a copy of the *infected* attachment, please e-mail helpdesk and include the whole of this message in your request. Alternatively, you can call them, with the contents of this message to hand when you call. At Thu Mar 13 19:14:01 2008 the virus scanner said: External message bodies cannot be scanned and are removed Note to Help Desk: Look on the mallorn MailScanner in /var/spool/quarantine= /20080313 (message m2DNDt58021863). --=20 Postmaster Mallorn Computing, Inc. http://www.mallorn.com/ For all your IT requirements visit: http://www.transtec.co.uk --NextPart-- From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 16:27:03 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.3 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206055330.53951@qb+Xj+ZXjkDP5maVFo7cOg X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:27:03 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DNM43k023269 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:22:10 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DN9PV4099419 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:09:25 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DN9Psk099418; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:09:25 -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 rufus.isode.com (rufus.isode.com [62.3.217.251]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DN9NRE099412 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:09:24 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from alexey.melnikov@isode.com) Received: from [130.129.21.224] (dhcp-15e0.ietf71.ietf.org [130.129.21.224]) by rufus.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPA id ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 23:09:22 +0000 Message-ID: <47D9B41C.7000202@isode.com> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 23:09:16 +0000 From: Alexey Melnikov User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.7.12) Gecko/20050915 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en To: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-sieve-body-08.txt References: <20080313230001.5071228C2AA@core3.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <20080313230001.5071228C2AA@core3.amsl.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean Internet-Drafts@ietf.org wrote: >A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts >directories. >This draft is a work item of the Sieve Mail Filtering Language Working Group of the IETF. > > Title : Sieve Email Filtering: Body Extension > Author(s) : P. Guenther, J. Degener > Filename : draft-ietf-sieve-body-08.txt > Pages : 13 > Date : 2008-3-13 > >This document defines a new command for the "Sieve" email > filtering language that tests for the occurrence of one or more > strings in the body of an email message. > >A URL for this Internet-Draft is: >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-sieve-body-08.txt > > This version addresses comments raised during the IESG review. It also contains some other useful clarifications. Please review asap to make sure that you are Ok with the changes. From owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Thu Mar 13 17:27:02 2008 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.2.3 (2007-08-08) on lorien.mallorn.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.9 required=4.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=ham version=3.2.3 X-mallorn-MailScanner-Watermark: 1206057335.26028@+g1ri3G8QSvu/PsawvXVlw X-Envelope-From: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org X-Envelope-To: Return-Path: Received: from lorien.mallorn.com [208.78.102.2] by remote.mallorn.com with POP3 (fetchmail-6.3.8) for (single-drop); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 17:27:02 -0700 (MST) Received: from balder-227.proper.com (Balder-227.Proper.COM [192.245.12.227]) by lorien.mallorn.com (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id m2DNtRIU028804 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 19:55:32 -0400 Received: from balder-227.proper.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DNh9h3002588 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:43:09 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org) Received: (from majordom@localhost) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.13.5/Submit) id m2DNh9TP002587; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:43:09 -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 mauve.mrochek.com (dsl-66-59-230-40.static.linkline.com [66.59.230.40]) by balder-227.proper.com (8.14.2/8.14.2) with ESMTP id m2DNh8BG002581 for ; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:43:09 -0700 (MST) (envelope-from ned.freed@mrochek.com) MIME-version: 1.0 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MSDOFS4QM8002H4R@mauve.mrochek.com> for ietf-mta-filters@imc.org; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:43:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01MSDNSZ7QI8000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com>; Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:43:05 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ietf-mta-filters@imc.org Message-id: <01MSDOFQYUQM000RLZ@mauve.mrochek.com> Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2008 16:30:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Ned Freed Subject: Re: Updated Sieve environment draft posted In-reply-to: "Your message dated Thu, 13 Mar 2008 12:59:07 -0400" <20080313165907.GA28015@osmium.mv.net> References: <01MS9H5GBL9K00005Q@mauve.mrochek.com> <20080313165907.GA28015@osmium.mv.net> To: Mark E Mallett DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nowsp; d=mrochek.com; s=mauve; t=1205451787; h=Date: From:Subject:MIME-version:Content-type; b=Qu7EpO33uX55tsMPRf7S2MxUj byOsK6Dyj17Vrz+tCc2w9ZsUlOImCXDK0JxRlVIya5v4zvqfWg37OFH7p4ARQ== Sender: owner-ietf-mta-filters@mail.imc.org Precedence: bulk List-Archive: List-ID: List-Unsubscribe: X-mallorn-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-mallorn-MailScanner: Found to be clean > On Mon, Mar 10, 2008 at 04:29:21PM -0700, Ned Freed wrote: > > > > I just posted an update to the environment draft; it should be in the > > repository soon. > Seems short and sweet. > > In addition to adding a note about using "name." > > prefixes to group related standard items, > That note is actually the only thing that gave me pause. When I read: > > Extensions designed for interoperable use SHOULD be