[Top] [All Lists]

Re: reply cut from the draft?

1998-05-29 14:04:19
From: Steve Hole <steve(_at_)esys(_dot_)ca>

On 19 May 1998 18:31:53 -0400 Tim Showalter 
<tjs+(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu> wrote:

As per John Myers suggestion at the IETF, I suggest that Reply be
removed from the draft.  Without a mechanism to prevent looping, or
sending out mail too often (like "vacation" will have), it is too
dangerous; such a mechanism requires on-server storage, and as Ned Freed 
has pointed out, this is not always availible.

OK, but only if vacation is moved along as part of the primary work of the 
working group then.    This is by far the most useful standardized function 
for all classes of distributed client (POP and IMAP).    There are other ways
to do the other things that SIEVE does, but there is no replacement for 
generating automatic replies and forwards.

I have no problem doing the vacation extension as a part of the work of
the group.

BTW, is there a WG?

Tim Showalter <tjs+(_at_)andrew(_dot_)cmu(_dot_)edu>