Subject: Is draft-daboo-sieve-spamtest-04.txt ready for IETF last call?

From: [email-masked]
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 2003 00:48:24 -0700 (PDT)

I noted that a new version of this document was just posted so I reviewed
it. I spotted only two minor things that need changing:

(1) As we saw with the subaddress sieve extension, the term "sieve" is
    used for other purposes in the IETF so the title needs to be more
    specific. I suggest "SIEVE Email Filtering: Spamtest and
    VirusTest Extensions".

(2) There's a bracket out of alignment in the example in section 3.3.

Both of these can be fixed with an RFC Editor note if need be.

This document was already last called on the list some time back and the -04
version appears to me to reflect the changes that were agreed to at that time.
Does everyone else feel this is now ready for IETF last call? If so I'd be
happy to start one.

				Ned

---

From: "Matthew Elvey (FM)" <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2003 16:11:32 -0700

On 10/22/2003 12:48 AM, [email-masked] sent forth electrons to 
convey:

>it. I spotted only two minor things that need changing <snip>
>
>
Two more fixes needed:
s/definately/definitely
s/implementors/implementers  

 I reviewed it and feel it's ready.

---

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 25 Oct 2003 00:43:05 -0700 (PDT)

> >Does everyone else feel this is now ready for IETF last call? If so I'd be

Added to the corrections list.

> s/implementors/implementers

American Heritage says either spelling is OK.

>  I reviewed it and feel it's ready.

Good. Thanks.

				Ned