[apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-appsawg-sieve-duplicate-02.txt

Tony Hansen <tony@att.com> Wed, 22 January 2014 23:15 UTC

Return-Path: <tony@att.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E07A11A01F6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:15:34 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.236
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.236 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_40=-0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.535] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rDDKwUcyg5Ht for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:15:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from flpi406.enaf.ffdc.sbc.com (egssmtp03.att.com [144.160.128.152]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2ECF81A0192 for <discuss@apps.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:15:33 -0800 (PST)
Received: from dns.maillennium.att.com (maillennium.att.com [135.25.114.99]) by egssmtp03.att.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id s0MNFUJh010167 for <discuss@apps.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 15:15:32 -0800
Received: from vpn-135-70-100-134.vpn.swst.att.com ([135.70.100.134]) by maillennium.att.com (mailgw1) with ESMTP id <20140122231529gw100j0cj2e>; Wed, 22 Jan 2014 23:15:30 +0000
X-Originating-IP: [135.70.100.134]
Message-ID: <52E05113.7000601@att.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 18:15:31 -0500
From: Tony Hansen <tony@att.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Apps-Discusssion <discuss@apps.ietf.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: [apps-discuss] AppsDir review of draft-ietf-appsawg-sieve-duplicate-02.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 22 Jan 2014 23:15:35 -0000

I have been selected as the Applications Area Directorate reviewer for this draft (for background on APPSDIR, please seehttp://trac.tools.ietf.org/area/app/trac/wiki/ApplicationsAreaDirectorate  ).

Please resolve these comments along with any other Last Call comments you may receive. Please wait for direction from your document shepherd or AD before posting a new version of the draft.

Document: draft-ietf-appsawg-sieve-duplicate-02.txt
Title: Sieve Email Filtering: Detecting Duplicate Deliveries
Reviewer: Tony Hansen
Review Date: January 21, 2014


This document is ready to be published.

	Tony Hansen

Major issues: none
Minor issues: none
Nits:

In section 1, paragraph 3, the second sentence below would read better if the words "based on" were changed to "using" or removed entirely:

    Duplicate messages are normally detected using the Message-ID header
    field, which is required to be unique for each message.  However, the
    "duplicate" test is flexible enough to use different criteria for
    defining what makes a message a duplicate, for example based on the
    subject line or parts of the message body.  Other applications of

giving this (after removing):

    Duplicate messages are normally detected using the Message-ID header
    field, which is required to be unique for each message.  However, the
    "duplicate" test is flexible enough to use different criteria for
    defining what makes a message a duplicate, for example the
    subject line or parts of the message body.  Other applications of

In section 3, paragraph 15, the words "an unique" should be "a unique".