[Top] [All Lists]

Re: New Sieve extension "refuse" proposal - draft-elvey-refuse-sieve-01h

2004-02-13 14:01:06

I would argue that there is a need, or at least desire, to have both "reject" 
and "refuse".

For one thing, you can't internationalize "refuse".  We have people who want to 
ensure for some
more "friendly" bounces that the original sender will see some "friendly" 
explanatory text.  So they
want to use "reject" so that they can: (a) ensure that their own text is 
presented to the original sending 
user (SMTP rejection text, in contrast, may or may not end up getting presented 
to the original sender),
and possibly (b) use another language/charset (language-appropriate subset of  
UTF8) for their rejection
text, possibly customizing the choice of language/characters based on 
characteristics of the message
being rejected.

But in other cases, with more "unfriendly" bounces, rejecting the message at 
the SMTP level is more
desirable.  When it's more important to limit load on or protect your own 
server vs. being "friendly" to 
the original sender, then "reject" can be more appealing. 

I can therefore envision cases of Sieve scripts that might wish to use both.


----- Original Message -----
From: Cyrus Daboo <daboo(_at_)cyrusoft(_dot_)com>
Date: Friday, February 13, 2004 7:59 am
Subject: Re: New Sieve extension "refuse" proposal - 

Hi Matthew,

--On Thursday, February 12, 2004 11:59 AM -0800 "Matthew Elvey 
<matthew(_at_)elvey(_dot_)fastmail(_dot_)fm> wrote:

| Hello, folks.  Please review and provide feedback on the "refuse"
| extension, designed to mostly replace Sieve's "reject" command.

Question - is there any situation where you would want both reject 
refuse available at the same time? i.e. couldn't we just get away 
with an 
extension that simply indicates that the existing reject command 
actually run during the SMTP transaction and will generate an SMTP 
instead of an MDN? Or, if modifying the base-spec reject behaviour 
really not allowed in this way, how about having refuse do either 
error or MDN as appropriate for the system? That would mean that 
users can 
write one script using a single command and have it work on any 
system, whether SIEVE runs at SMTP time or post-SMTP. I would hate 
to have 
to change reject<->refuse every time I moved or copied a script 
different systems.

Cyrus Daboo

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>