Subject: Re: [sieve] AD review of draft-ietf-sieve-autoreply

From: Peter Saint-Andre <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2010 11:10:40 -0700

On 11/30/10 12:57 PM, Barry Leiba wrote:
>>> The introduction references the last paragraph of the security
>>> considerations, but as far as I can see that paragraph doesn't have
>>> anything to do with security and I think it would make more sense to
>>> include this text in the introduction...
>>>
>>>  Finally, users of any auto-reply mechanism should really think about
>>>  whether automatic replies are necessary, and at what interval they
>>>  make sense when they are.  Email is not Instant Messaging, and
>>>  senders generally expect that replies might take a while.  Consider
>>>  whether it's truly important to tell people that you'll read their
>>>  mail in an hour or so, or whether that can just be taken as how email
>>>  works.  There are times when this makes sense, but let's not use it
>>>  to exacerbate information overload.
>>>
>>
>> Works for me.
> 
> And for me as well.  I've made the change in my working copy.
> 
>>> This document normatively references several other I-Ds. Does the WG
>>> have any concerns that the referenced I-Ds will change materially? It
>>> seems perhaps safer to advance the referenced I-Ds first, just in case.
>>
>> The document references 3 other drafts. One of them is still being worked on
>> (Sieve external list), the other 2 are already in IESG review.
>> So far the proposed changes to Seive external list don't invalidate
>> examples.
> 
> The only relevant change I foresee in external-list is the use of a
> "pab" URI scheme.  The autoreply doc will wait in the RFC-ed queue for
> external-list anyway, and if we decide to change one of the examples
> to use "pab:default", say, we can do that during AUTH48.  It won't
> change the substance of the autoreply doc, in any case.

OK.

Barry, if you have changes in your working copy, could you please submit
a revised I-D? Then I will get this on the agenda for the December 16
IESG telechat.

Thanks!

Peter

-- 
Peter Saint-Andre
https://stpeter.im/

---

From: Barry Leiba <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 3 Dec 2010 14:24:12 -0500

> a revised I-D? Then I will get this on the agenda for the December 16

Done.

b