IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAP

SM <sm@resistor.net> Tue, 10 January 2012 21:07 UTC

Return-Path: <sm@resistor.net>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B6371F0C3E for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:07:51 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.000, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id XZdSQJihnqZu for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:07:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mx.ipv6.elandsys.com (mx.ipv6.elandsys.com [IPv6:2001:470:f329:1::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id B02061F0C38 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:07:48 -0800 (PST)
Received: from SUBMAN.resistor.net (IDENT:sm@localhost [127.0.0.1]) (authenticated bits=0) by mx.elandsys.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q0AL7g0p016655 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 10 Jan 2012 13:07:46 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=resistor.net; s=mail; t=1326229667; i=@resistor.net; bh=AV5fo6S22s0wCvJjgnDy/nOxaroqo6aWQSuPZeH0Rf4=; h=Message-Id:Date:To:From:Subject:In-Reply-To:References: Mime-Version:Content-Type:Cc; b=VeqfjW0N42L2ilGWDTkE0Q6SxZK7capJK3+okNPeRWhklDHQrD30t0Wn9sp6V0b8N 1S6rCG1P/1M/Kldqlw6hEjEZ2CBiCqn+bUfZOHxxFUs81PlND7JrUb44hZjaxD7cV8 /RlYPkZ2ANDkCCrNdKtw8l6fnj/KES7C6SXU5U50=
Message-Id: <6.2.5.6.2.20120110124010.0968e868@resistor.net>
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 6.2.5.6
Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:57:04 -0800
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
From: SM <sm@resistor.net>
In-Reply-To: <4F0C8F7E.4070809@tana.it>
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C157A4@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120109155713.0b022fe0@resistor.net> <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C157C8@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com> <6.2.5.6.2.20120109171236.0ad2e840@resistor.net> <4F0C8F7E.4070809@tana.it>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format="flowed"
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAP
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 10 Jan 2012 21:07:51 -0000

At 11:20 10-01-2012, Alessandro Vesely wrote:
>I posted a draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed-00 with

In my opinion, this is not a good idea.

>I've made some arbitrary changes, including IPR, as explained in the
>appendix.  If that's not correct, please delete my post.  The doc is
>not to be used directly anyway: Zoltan can reuse any xml parts that he
>likes and repost the result as version -01 of its draft

Zoltan Ordogh and Alessandro Vesely are listed as the author/editor 
of draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed-00.  Are they 
stating on behalf of Research In Motion Limited that IPR disclosure 
#1609 is not applicable for draft-ordogh-spam-reporting-using-imap-kleansed-00?

Regards,
-sm

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email