[Top] [All Lists]

Re: new vacation draft

2004-11-03 04:48:43

I generally believe this reflects the last round of changes, but there 
were some editorial comments that I felt I couldn't incorporate becaue I 
couldn't improve on my text.  If you have editorial suggestions, text 
would be greatly appreciated.

Overall, I am happy with the new version.  Now, my list of implementation
notes mostly consists of the fact that message composition when using
":mime" is not defined anywhere and that there is a conflict whether to
use "Re: " or "Auto: ".  Further, "Re: " is to be taken as a literal
string, not as "[rR][eE]: *", as some older mail/news clients used.
I would be glad if a new version could state that clearly, just to be on
the safe side.

There is one (new?) problem in Section 3.2:

                    (The SMTP MAIL FROM address should be available in
     the Return-path: header field if sieve processing occurs after
     final delivery.)

That's not the case for bounces.  A bunch software writers thinks
different and as a result, the local part mailer-daemon at larger sites
is flooded with vacation responses of various systems real bad.  I know
that the Sieve vacation extension tries to avoid that by not responding to
well known addresses, but that does not make the above statement correct.
I suggest to remove references to "Return-path:".


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