Matt reviews mailing list addresses, etc.
Matt reviews agenda.
- Don't want working group.
- Have draft charter, just in case.
- Want to get consensus at end of BOF about WG.
Tim explains syntax briefly.
Tim reviews open issues.
- Vacation in base spec or extension?
- reason for base: it's important -- to some, the very reason for having Sieve
- reason for extension: it's a long section; it provides a prototype for writing extensions
- consensus: do it as an extension
- Action interaction e.g. reject vs. keep/fileinto
- discard is compatible with everything -- just cancels the default keep
- reject is incompatible with all but discard
- keep == fileinto "inbox"
- add to spec: extensions should discuss incompatible actions
- discussion about extensions having to refer to other extensions, easy to get out of hand.
- discuss on mailing list for resolution
Site limits on actions (number of forward addresses, for instance)
- multiple reject MUST NOT
- at least one fileinto/keep MUST
- at least one redirect MUST
- redirect: no, remove
- exceeding limit causes a script error
- Require must be at beginning of script
- User-specified charset on outgoing msg
- text may be MIME object?
- OK... put in switch: text or MIME
- Text will be added talking about errors in script
Discussion about adding headers in redirect
- Want to add loop detection and received headers
- What about resent headers?
- Some say it's not user-initiated.
- Some consider that it *is* user-initiated.
- Consensus... Eliminate text about not adding headers
Discussion about discarding messages, what to do with DSNs
- Take to mailing list
- Vacation incompatible with reject & vacation.
- Does not cancel implicit keep.
- Remembering who was responded to is not just per address, but per address per vacation command.
- If script changes, implementations MAY reset response memory.
Add req't for impl dependent list of addresses that vacation never replies to, List MUST include POSTMASTER, SHOULD include others.
- Remove specific addresses, replace with general advice, refer to RFCs.
- Request to be very explicit about this, to avoid loops & annoyances calendar in vacation? -- out of scope
Proposes getting revision out in 3 weeks, for IETF last call (4 weeks).
Includes base & vacation. Call for WG... unanimous: no.