Scott Hollenbeck wrote:
Just a small nit and a question:
The Abstract should be more clear about the focus of the document. It
describes "This extension", but it doesn't explain what's being extended.
The Abstract currently says:
In advanced filtering rule sets, it is useful to keep state or
configuration details across rules. This extension changes the
interpretation of strings, adds an action to store data in variables,
and supplies a new test so that the value of a string can be
examined.
How about the following:
In advanced filtering rule sets, it is useful to keep state or
configuration details across rules. This document describes a
SIEVE (RFC XXXX) extension that changes the
interpretation of strings, adds an action to store data in variables,
and supplies a new test so that the value of a string can be
examined.
?
RFC 2234 has been obsoleted. Can the reference to 2234 be updated to refer
to 2234bis instead?
Absolutely. But I personally would prefer if the document is not delayed
on this reference. In practice, this might not be an issue, as there is
at least one normative reference (base Sieve document) that would have
to be satisfied first.
These are minor. Please hold off on making any changes until IETF last call
comments can be addressed.