[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [sieve] New Version Notification for draft-george-sieve-vacation-time-00

2010-02-07 23:20:41
2010/2/6 Ned Freed <ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)mrochek(_dot_)com>:
Event in that context, I'd still infer address based on the recipient
-- the system level script should still know whose mailbox the message
will be delivered to.

IMO that's a *really* bad idea. You're forging mail when you do this.

Hmm. Fair point. If a system sieve were to use the vacation mechanism
to report that a user has been suspended, or a mailbox is over quota,
etc., the reply ought to come from a system address. Arnt, did you
have another use case in mind?

Always remember that :from can be used to override the default, and if need be
you can use variables to fill in the from field from the original message. And
presumably any persmissions check would be fairly permissive for a 

(And is this a reasonable issue to
discuss or just a rathole to discuss the depth of?)

Well, it does appear that the WG has opted for the include file appproach
rather than the multisieve approach for standardization. (I'm not saying it's
either-or here, but there's considerable overlap in the functionality they

I've been planning to revive the multiscript document, as system-level
sieves are an idea many of us have batted around. I believe it's
[mostly] orthogonal to includes.

I'm not a big fan of the include approach, perhaps because I've spent way too
much time fighting with *&^%*&^% C and C++ system includes when dealing with
multiple platforms. But that's just a personal bias.

OTOH, it's not like we've been inundated with WG traffic over the past year...


sieve mailing list