Subject: /postfix/sieve configuration

From: "Manfred Friedrich" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 20:31:28 +0200

Hi,

At firs I hope this is not the wrong mailing list :-{

So postfix is installed and works proper.

But sieve does not work!

I checkt with 'telnet localhost sieve' to connect. I take a look to the
/var/log/message an found the following entrys:
---
Jul 19 20:17:59 onyx-02 master[3362]: about to exec
/usr/lib/cyrus/bin/timsieved 
Jul 19 20:18:00 onyx-02 sieve[3362]: executed 
Jul 19 20:18:00 onyx-02 sieve[3362]: accepted connection 
Jul 19 20:18:00 onyx-02 timsieved[3362]: can't use home directories
---

Ok I think thats looks fine. 

The $home hase this .sieve file:
---
require "fileinto";
require "reject";
require "vacation";
require "regex";

if header :contains "Subject" "test" {
     reject "thaks for test";
}
---
Bdw: -the 'imapd.conf' has the propertie 'sieveusehomedir: true'
     -there is no $home/.forward

fetchmail catches the mails - I take a look to the /var/log/message:
---
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 master[3588]: about to exec
/usr/lib/cyrus/bin/lmtpd
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpunix[3588]: executed
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: accepted connection
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: lmtp connection preauth'd as
postman
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: duplicate_check:
<002201c34e21$126126f0$0b01a8c0@onyxxp>  user.root            0
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: mystore: starting txn 2147483665
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: mystore: committing txn 2147483665
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: duplicate_mark:
<002201c34e21$126126f0$0b01a8c0@onyxxp>  user.root         
---

Nothing happend there is no sieve action? 

Whats wrong?

So long ... 

Manfred

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Manfred Friedrich [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Gesendet: Samstag, 19. Juli 2003 17:07
> An: [email-masked]
> Betreff: AW: /postfix/sieve
> 
> 
> Hmmmm,
> 
> Soweit danke!
> Laut yast ist das packet installiert.
> 
> Tip wie's weitergeht - Habe keine gesch. doku gefunden?
> 
> gruss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Roland Harke [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Gesendet: Samstag, 19. Juli 2003 15:37
> > An: [email-masked]
> > Betreff: Re: /postfix/sieve
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > pin sieve
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *** no rpm named sieve installed
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> >  maybe just a typo? what about this:
> > 
> > perl-Cyrus-SIEVE-managesieve-2.1.12-29
> > 
> >  maybe better restart with another option? grepping anyway ...
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *** zgrep sieve /var/lib/pin/ARCHIVES.gz
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > ---> ./CD3/suse/i586/perl-Cyrus-SIEVE-managesieve-2.1.12-29.i586.rpm
> > 
> > 
> > mit Yast2 installieren ...
> > 
> > MfG, Roland
> > 
> > Am Samstag, 19. Juli 2003 14:44 schrieb Manfred Friedrich:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Suse 8.2
> > >
> > > Cyrus/postfix ist eingerichtet und läuft. Nun möchte ich unter 
> > > zurhilfenahme von sieve mails filtern. Allerdings scheint
> sieve in
> > > eure distribution nicht enthalten zu sein?!
> > >
> > > Was muss ich tun um sieve zu aktivieren bzw. zu
> installieren o. ä. ?
> > >
> > > Danke im vorraus!
> > >
> > >
> > > Manfred
> > 
> > --
> > [email-masked]
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Um die Liste abzubestellen, schicken Sie eine Mail an:
> >     [email-masked]
> > Um eine Liste aller verfuegbaren Kommandos zu bekommen,
> > schicken Sie eine Mail an: [email-masked]
> > 
> 
> 
> --
> Um die Liste abzubestellen, schicken Sie eine Mail an:
>     [email-masked]
> Um eine Liste aller verfuegbaren Kommandos zu bekommen, schicken
> Sie eine Mail an: [email-masked]
> 

From: "Manfred Friedrich" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: /postfix/sieve configuration
Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2003 20:31:28 +0200
Importance: Normal
Sender: [email-masked]

Hi,

At firs I hope this is not the wrong mailing list :-{

So postfix is installed and works proper.

But sieve does not work!

I checkt with 'telnet localhost sieve' to connect. I take a look to the
/var/log/message an found the following entrys:
---
Jul 19 20:17:59 onyx-02 master[3362]: about to exec
/usr/lib/cyrus/bin/timsieved 
Jul 19 20:18:00 onyx-02 sieve[3362]: executed 
Jul 19 20:18:00 onyx-02 sieve[3362]: accepted connection 
Jul 19 20:18:00 onyx-02 timsieved[3362]: can't use home directories
---

Ok I think thats looks fine. 

The $home hase this .sieve file:
---
require "fileinto";
require "reject";
require "vacation";
require "regex";

if header :contains "Subject" "test" {
     reject "thaks for test";
}
---
Bdw: -the 'imapd.conf' has the propertie 'sieveusehomedir: true'
     -there is no $home/.forward

fetchmail catches the mails - I take a look to the /var/log/message:
---
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 master[3588]: about to exec
/usr/lib/cyrus/bin/lmtpd
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpunix[3588]: executed
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: accepted connection
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: lmtp connection preauth'd as
postman
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: duplicate_check:
<002201c34e21$126126f0$0b01a8c0@onyxxp>  user.root            0
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: mystore: starting txn 2147483665
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: mystore: committing txn 2147483665
Jul 19 22:21:12 onyx-02 lmtpd[3588]: duplicate_mark:
<002201c34e21$126126f0$0b01a8c0@onyxxp>  user.root         
---

Nothing happend there is no sieve action? 

Whats wrong?

So long ... 

Manfred

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Manfred Friedrich [mailto:[email-masked]]
> Gesendet: Samstag, 19. Juli 2003 17:07
> An: [email-masked]
> Betreff: AW: /postfix/sieve
> 
> 
> Hmmmm,
> 
> Soweit danke!
> Laut yast ist das packet installiert.
> 
> Tip wie's weitergeht - Habe keine gesch. doku gefunden?
> 
> gruss
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Roland Harke [mailto:[email-masked]]
> > Gesendet: Samstag, 19. Juli 2003 15:37
> > An: [email-masked]
> > Betreff: Re: /postfix/sieve
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > pin sieve
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *** no rpm named sieve installed
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> >  maybe just a typo? what about this:
> > 
> > perl-Cyrus-SIEVE-managesieve-2.1.12-29
> > 
> >  maybe better restart with another option? grepping anyway ...
> > 
> > 
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > *** zgrep sieve /var/lib/pin/ARCHIVES.gz
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 
> > ---> ./CD3/suse/i586/perl-Cyrus-SIEVE-managesieve-2.1.12-29.i586.rpm
> > 
> > 
> > mit Yast2 installieren ...
> > 
> > MfG, Roland
> > 
> > Am Samstag, 19. Juli 2003 14:44 schrieb Manfred Friedrich:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > Suse 8.2
> > >
> > > Cyrus/postfix ist eingerichtet und läuft. Nun möchte ich unter 
> > > zurhilfenahme von sieve mails filtern. Allerdings scheint
> sieve in
> > > eure distribution nicht enthalten zu sein?!
> > >
> > > Was muss ich tun um sieve zu aktivieren bzw. zu
> installieren o. ä. ?
> > >
> > > Danke im vorraus!
> > >
> > >
> > > Manfred
> > 
> > --
> > [email-masked]
> > 
> > 
> > --
> > Um die Liste abzubestellen, schicken Sie eine Mail an:
> >     [email-masked]
> > Um eine Liste aller verfuegbaren Kommandos zu bekommen,
> > schicken Sie eine Mail an: [email-masked]
> > 
> 
> 
> --
> Um die Liste abzubestellen, schicken Sie eine Mail an:
>     [email-masked]
> Um eine Liste aller verfuegbaren Kommandos zu bekommen, schicken
> Sie eine Mail an: [email-masked]
> 

From: Werner =?iso-8859-1?q?H=FCbner?= <[email-masked]>
Organization: TU Delft
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Cyrus does not apply sieve script
Date: Fri, 18 Jul 2003 16:42:32 +0200
Sender: [email-masked]

I just copied the sieve scriped from a colleque to get some filters 
for my incoming email. While the script works fine for my colleque
it does not for me. To test I sent an email to both of us. His copy 
was move to a subfolder of INBOX as intended, but not mine. Has
anybody an idea what's going wrong here? Of course we already 
checked the rights if the files and the email folders! Everything is 
excatly the same. 

Thanks for your help,

Werner

From: "hm" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Protocol GRE(47)-packets are blocked from outside
Date: Sat, 5 Jul 2003 14:59:55 +0200
Sender: [email-masked]

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_003C_01C34306.1849F270
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi,

I've the problem, that my configuration did block the GRE protocol when I
try to connect to a pptp server from my net (the returning packets). I've
sniffed
and I saw that icmp-packets with protocol unreachable went back to the
server.
The same thing for protocol icmp did work. I'm using also the modules from
netfilter for pptp and gre, but also without them the problem occurs...
I have my configuration attached...thanx ahead...

Flushing all current rules: - OK
Removing user defined chains: - OK
Changing target policies to DROP:  - OK
Allowing 192.168.1.0/24 traffic out: - OK
Allowing 192.168.7.0/24 traffic out: - OK
Allowing 217.88.183.59/32 traffic out: - OK
Allowing response traffic: - OK
Allowing localhost communications: - OK
Allowing connections to udp port 4672: - OK
Allowing connections to tcp port 22: - OK
Allowing connections to tcp port 80: - OK
Allowing connections to tcp port 443: - OK
Allowing connections to tcp port 4662: - OK
Allowing connections to tcp port 1720: - OK
Allowing connections to tcp port 1723: - OK
Forwarding 217.88.183.59(4662) to 192.168.1.3(4662): - OK
Forwarding 217.88.183.59(4672) to 192.168.1.3(4672): - OK
Forwarding 217.88.183.59(1720) to 192.168.1.2(1720): - OK
Masq'ing 192.168.1.0/24: - OK
Masq'ing 192.168.7.0/24: - OK
Masq'ing 217.88.183.59/32: - OK
Allowing Gateway out eth1 - OK
Allowing Gateway to connect to self - OK
Allowing protocol 1 connections from 0/0: - OK
Allowing protocol 47 connections from 0/0: - OK
Enabling dropped packet logging: - OK

------=_NextPart_000_003C_01C34306.1849F270
Content-Type: text/plain;
	name="out.txt"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Disposition: attachment;
	filename="out.txt"

ext.IP: 217.88.183.59=0A=
Table: filter=0A=
Chain INPUT (policy DROP 1 packets, 40 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     47   --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     icmp --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
  150  9371 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          state RELATED,ESTABLISHED =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       127.0.0.1            =
127.0.0.1          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          udp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:22 =0A=
    1    40 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:80 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:443 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:4662 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:1723 =0A=
    9  1144 ACCEPT     all  --  eth0   *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  lo     *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  tun0   *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Filter-INPUT ' =0A=
=0A=
Chain FORWARD (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
   38  2449 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          state RELATED,ESTABLISHED =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    7   318 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.2        udp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.2        tcp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4662 =0A=
    2    96 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4662 =0A=
    0     0 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Filter-FORWARD ' =0A=
=0A=
Chain OUTPUT (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
  146 20021 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          state RELATED,ESTABLISHED =0A=
    3   622 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
   49  2712 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       127.0.0.1            =
127.0.0.1          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      eth1    0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      lo      217.88.183.59        =
217.88.183.59      =0A=
    0     0 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Filter-OUTPUT ' =0A=
=0A=
Table: nat=0A=
Chain PREROUTING (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
   13  1238 block_nat  all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     47   --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     icmp --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 DNAT       udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      udp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.2:1720 =0A=
    0     0 DNAT       tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      tcp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.2:1720 =0A=
    0     0 DNAT       udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      udp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.3:4672 =0A=
    0     0 DNAT       tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      tcp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.3:4672 =0A=
    0     0 DNAT       udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      udp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.3:4662 =0A=
    2    96 DNAT       tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      tcp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.3:4662 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          udp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:22 =0A=
    1    40 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:80 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:443 =0A=
    2    96 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:4662 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:1723 =0A=
    8  1006 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  eth0   *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  lo     *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  tun0   *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Nat-PREROUTING ' =0A=
=0A=
Chain POSTROUTING (policy DROP 48 packets, 2640 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
192.168.1.2        udp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
192.168.1.2        tcp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
192.168.1.2        udp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
192.168.1.2        tcp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
192.168.1.2        udp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
192.168.1.2        tcp dpt:1720 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.2        udp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.2        tcp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4672 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       udp  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 SNAT       tcp  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4662 to:192.168.1.1 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        udp dpt:4662 =0A=
    2    96 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
192.168.1.3        tcp dpt:4662 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       127.0.0.1            =
127.0.0.1          =0A=
    5   270 MASQUERADE  all  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 MASQUERADE  all  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    1    72 MASQUERADE  all  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      eth1    0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      lo      217.88.183.59        =
217.88.183.59      =0A=
    0     0 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Nat-POSTROUTING ' =0A=
=0A=
Chain OUTPUT (policy DROP 0 packets, 0 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
    1    78 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
   49  2712 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       127.0.0.1            =
127.0.0.1          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      eth1    0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      lo      217.88.183.59        =
217.88.183.59      =0A=
    0     0 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Nat-OUTPUT ' =0A=
=0A=
Chain block_nat (1 references)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
=0A=
Table: mangle=0A=
Chain PREROUTING (policy DROP 3 packets, 190 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
  186 12648 block_mangle  all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     47   --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     icmp --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      udp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      tcp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      udp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      tcp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      udp dpt:4662 =0A=
    2    96 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
217.88.183.59      tcp dpt:4662 =0A=
  188 11820 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          state RELATED,ESTABLISHED =0A=
   18  1542 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       127.0.0.1            =
127.0.0.1          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     udp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          udp dpt:4672 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:22 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:80 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:443 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:4662 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:1720 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     tcp  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          tcp dpt:1723 =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  eth0   *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  lo     *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  tun0   *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    3   190 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Mangle-PREROUTING ' =0A=
=0A=
Chain INPUT (policy ACCEPT 161 packets, 10595 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
=0A=
Chain FORWARD (policy ACCEPT 47 packets, 2863 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
=0A=
Chain OUTPUT (policy DROP 1 packets, 408 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
  146 20021 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          state RELATED,ESTABLISHED =0A=
    3   622 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.1.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       192.168.7.0/24       =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
   49  2712 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       217.88.183.59        =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      *       127.0.0.1            =
127.0.0.1          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      eth1    0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          =0A=
    0     0 ACCEPT     all  --  *      lo      217.88.183.59        =
217.88.183.59      =0A=
    0     0 LOG        all  --  *      *       0.0.0.0/0            =
0.0.0.0/0          LOG flags 0 level 6 prefix `FW: Mangle-OUTPUT ' =0A=
=0A=
Chain POSTROUTING (policy ACCEPT 246 packets, 26296 bytes)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
=0A=
Chain block_mangle (1 references)=0A=
 pkts bytes target     prot opt in     out     source               =
destination         =0A=
=0A=

------=_NextPart_000_003C_01C34306.1849F270--

To: "hm" <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: changing the address from a redirect of sieve
From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 17:39:27 +0200
Sender: [email-masked]

[hm]:
>
>   I like to know howto change the address when I redirect an email,
>   of course the sender email address is like cyrus@host; but I want
>   to have myname@specialhost

it's not clear what you want to do, so I'll guess.

Sieve can't currently change the content of an e-mail, so you can only
change the envelope address for the recipient.  Jutta Degener has
however written a draft for an extension to do so.

 <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-degener-sieve-editheader-00.txt>

-- 
Kjetil T.			|  read and make up your own mind
				|  http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: GTUBE/Re: Quizzic: Spam equivalent to EICAR test virus proposal.
From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 23:49:44 +0200
Sender: [email-masked]

[Matthew Elvey (FM)]:
>
>   Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:
>   
>   > might as well leave SMTP out of it.  connect to a port, enter a
>   > recipient address,
>
>   Whatever is easier to implement and use.  A web form would work too.
>   
>   But I think SMTP is probably best.

I'm just worried about the service being abused by spammers.

>   For example, say you want to test a system that scans for spam on
>   the way OUT.

interesting point.

>   You'd set your client's (outoging) smtp server to
>   QuizzicServer.MIT.edu or whatever.  If there's an SMTP proxy run
>   by your system or ISP, this gives it a chance to be shown to work.

running transparent SMTP proxies is not very common, is it?  in any
case, you could use _any_ other e-mail address on the Internet to test
outbound.

>   I also think it's simplest to implement with existing software.

this is where I disagree strongly :-)

>   > and the server will connect to the MX of the source IP.  (make
>   > sure the reverse and forward lookup match.)
>
>   Can you explain this more? I'm not clear on what you're trying to do
>   here or why.

say I connect from 129.240.68.200.  reverse lookup gives
vingodur.ifi.uio.no.  the MX for vingodur is pat.uio.no.  so the reply
will be sent to pat.  since pat is relay proof, I must provide a valid
address at the University of Oslo for the e-mail to be accepted.

now, if I want to fool the quizzic server into harrassing you, I'd
change the reverse lookup of 129.240.68.200 to elvey.fastmail.fm,
whose MX is smtp.us.messagingengine.com, and so you'll receive the
message.  it is therefore essential that a forward lookup of
elvey.fastmail.fm is done to see if the IP address(es) match.

>   Is this test something that would make Quizzic hard for
>   joe user to use?

only if Joe User's network administrator is incompetent. :-)

-- 
Kjetil T.			|  read and make up your own mind
				|  http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 10:56:06 -0700
From: "Matthew Elvey (FM)" <[email-masked]>
To: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: GTUBE/Re: Quizzic: Spam equivalent to EICAR test virus proposal.
Sender: [email-masked]

Kjetil Torgrim Homme wrote:

>[Matthew Elvey (FM)]:
>  
>
>>  Matt Sergeant of SpamAssassin posted very relevantly to the ASRG about
>>  GTUBE in March:
>>  https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg01527.html+gtube
>>
Correction: (take off the +gtube - the URL stopped working with that)

https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg01527.html

>>  
>>  There were a couple replies that are meritless from Vernon
>>  Schryver and Kee Hinckley.  A valid complaint was what about
>>  antispam systems that aren't content filters?
>>    
>>
>
>that's a bit harsh on Vernon Schryver, his idea of setting up an
>auto-responder from a fixed IP-address is exactly what you propose.
>
Great. I haven't seen him propose that. I guess I missed it. He's got 
lots of good ideas, just not on that thread, as far as I saw.
Tact and collegiality were missing. My intent was to make others' 
reading of the thread go quicker by echoing what's said at
https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg01678.html 
- he seemed to have misunderstood the purpose. 

>
>  
>
>>  Enhancement to my scheme to more fully address it: A pseudo-open
>>  relay could be established (run by who?)
>>    
>>
>
>probably someone academic, for stability topologywise, and also for
>IPv6 support.  the problem is that willfully getting your host listed
>in RBL is scary.  you never know what people will jump to conclusions
>and blacklist your entire B-net.  (perhaps MIT could run it in its own
>B-net ;-)
>
ICANN ISOC IESG IETF IANA... so many I*s but none with this falling 
within their charter AFAIK.

>
>  
>
>>  that would (attempt to) relay only Quizzic-compliant messages.
>>    
>>
>
>might as well leave SMTP out of it.  connect to a port, enter a
>recipient address, 
>
Whatever is easier to implement and use.  A web form would work too.

But I think SMTP is probably best.  For example, say you want to test a 
system that scans for spam on the way OUT.
You'd set your client's (outoging) smtp server to QuizzicServer.MIT.edu 
or whatever.  If there's an SMTP proxy run by your system or ISP, this 
gives it a chance to be shown to work.  I also think it's simplest to 
implement with existing software.

>and the server will connect to the MX of the source
>IP.  (make sure the reverse and forward lookup match.) 
>
Can you explain this more? I'm not clear on what you're trying to do 
here or why.  Is this test something that would make Quizzic hard for 
joe user to use?
I guess if we're sticking with SMTP, if joe user's SMTP server doesn't 
have matching lookups, tough-a lot of servers are rejecting his mail; 
(this is the least of his problems, and the shortcoming might help joe 
user become aware of it), but if he's suposed to telnet from his windoze 
PC, expecting matching lookups is a bit unreasonable.

> the message
>will be fixed, and therefore not attractive to abuse by spammers.
>
I'm trying to allow flexibility that may be useful while still not 
making it attractive to spammers.
At least, I'd like to have the email address of the (purported) sender 
be available.  The source IP would be in the mail header; SpamCop and 
workalikes would  be configured to trust the system and consider the 
source IP as the source of spam, and, by default at least, not report 
Quizzic reports as spam at all.

>rate limiting per source IP (no more than 10 messages a day?) will
>stop the people trying to use it to DOS. 
>
Rate limiting makes sense. 

>
>  
>
>>  Sounds like the effort is still needed and  the need is there.
>>    
>>
>
>it seems to me that asrg is the proper forum, though.
>
The noise is deafening and the (admittedly oft-ignored) charter - 
http://www.irtf.org/asrg/ doesn't seem to admit this topic, so I'm 
reluctant to go there.
Anyone else want/not want the discussion here?

To: "Matthew Elvey (FM)" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: GTUBE/Re: Quizzic: Spam equivalent to EICAR test virus proposal.
From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[email-masked]>
Date: Thu, 03 Jul 2003 15:33:40 +0200
Sender: [email-masked]

[Matthew Elvey (FM)]:
>
>   Matt Sergeant of SpamAssassin posted very relevantly to the ASRG about
>   GTUBE in March:
>   https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg01527.html+gtube
>   
>   There were a couple replies that are meritless from Vernon
>   Schryver and Kee Hinckley.  A valid complaint was what about
>   antispam systems that aren't content filters?

that's a bit harsh on Vernon Schryver, his idea of setting up an
auto-responder from a fixed IP-address is exactly what you propose.

>   Enhancement to my scheme to more fully address it: A pseudo-open
>   relay could be established (run by who?)

probably someone academic, for stability topologywise, and also for
IPv6 support.  the problem is that willfully getting your host listed
in RBL is scary.  you never know what people will jump to conclusions
and blacklist your entire B-net.  (perhaps MIT could run it in its own
B-net ;-)

>   that would (attempt to) relay only Quizzic-compliant messages.

might as well leave SMTP out of it.  connect to a port, enter a
recipient address, and the server will connect to the MX of the source
IP.  (make sure the reverse and forward lookup match.)  the message
will be fixed, and therefore not attractive to abuse by spammers.
rate limiting per source IP (no more than 10 messages a day?) will
stop the people trying to use it to DOS.

>   Sounds like the effort is still needed and  the need is there.

it seems to me that asrg is the proper forum, though.

-- 
Kjetil T.			|  read and make up your own mind
				|  http://www.cactus48.com/truth.html

Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 16:02:24 -0600
From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Organization: Isode Limited
To: Nigel Swinson <[email-masked]>
CC: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt
Sender: [email-masked]

Nigel Swinson wrote:

> 3.1. Addflag action
>
> - Duplicates are allowed and ignored?  Do we need to specify that we just
> ignore them, or should our "list" maintain both entries?  I see in 4 and 6
> there is a note about this issue, but perhaps it would help to have a
> comment in this section that "duplicate removal" is seen as optional.

Actually I would like to give implementations freedom of choice.

> 3.2 Removeflag Action
>
> - Example contains :globalflags , But :globalflags isn't defined anywhere in
> the document.  I remember it from the old revisions, did it get dropped?

Yes. Fixed now. Thank you.

> If so this example is now out of date...
>
> - If duplicate removal is "optional", then what happens if we have two
> flags, and we are asked to removeflag that flag.  We remove both
> occurrences?

Yes, that was my indent.

>  Would it perhaps just be easier to say that we MUST do
> duplicate removal during addflags?  Both removal of existing duplicates
> before we add the new flags, and any new duplicates created after adding the
> flags?
>
> - Don't understand what "Multiple occurrences of removeflag are treated
> additively." means.  Does that mean multiple removeflag actions are treated
> additively, or does it refer to the content of the flags and answer my
> previous question about when multiple flags exist with the same name?

The former. I've changed the text a bit to make it more clear.

> 10. Extended Example
>
> - Extended example contains a few "add" actions that I think should be
> "addflags".

Correct.

> - Suggest that you don't use a variable name of  "flags" in the example, as
> it may confuse.  Maybe "MyFlags" or something might be safer?

Sure.

Alexey
__________________________________________
Home Page: http://orthanc.ab.ca/mel
IETF standard
related pages: http://orthanc.ab.ca/mel/devel/Links.html
__________________________________________

Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2003 08:20:35 -0700
From: "Matthew Elvey (FM)" <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked]
Subject: GTUBE/Re: Quizzic: Spam equivalent to EICAR test virus proposal.
Sender: [email-masked]

Bart Schaefer wrote:

>Just for comparison:
>
>SpamAssassin defines what's called the Generic Test for Unsolicited Bulk
>Email (GTUBE).  It's defined as a string matching the regular expression
>
>XJS\*C4JDBQADN1\.NSBN3\*2IDNEN\*GTUBE-STANDARD-ANTI-UBE-TEST-EMAIL\*C\.34X
>
>appearing anywhere in the message body, after decoding and HTML rendering.
>
>(I write the regular expression rather than the string itself so that any
>of you running spamassassin won't score this message at 1000 points.)
>
>  
>
Thanks! So a start has been made. 

http://spamassassin.planetmirror.com/dist/t/data/spam/gtube.eml - a sample.

Matt Sergeant of SpamAssassin posted very relevantly to the ASRG about 
GTUBE in March:
https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg01527.html+gtube

There were a couple replies that are meritless from Vernon Schryver and 
Kee Hinckley
A valid complaint was  what about antispam systems that aren't content 
filters?

Enhancement to my scheme to more fully address it:
A pseudo-open relay could be established (run by who?)  that would 
(attempt to) relay only Quizzic-compliant messages.  It would be listed 
in all blacklists.  The From would be specified to be that of a 
specified domain, which would go in all domain-based blacklists. 
([email-masked], as previously suggested).
It would not 2xx OK the SMTP DATA command, but rather send a 4xx/5xx 
error (the same one it encountered) if the attempt to relay failed.

Matt posted this helpful reply:
https://www1.ietf.org/mail-archive/working-groups/asrg/current/msg01625.html
not realizing that there was a solution to his item 1 w/o spoofing.

Sounds like the effort is still needed and  the need is there.

From: "Nigel Swinson" <[email-masked]>
To: <[email-masked]>
Cc: <[email-masked]>
Subject: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 14:11:09 +0100
Sender: [email-masked]

3.1. Addflag action

- Duplicates are allowed and ignored?  Do we need to specify that we just
ignore them, or should our "list" maintain both entries?  I see in 4 and 6
there is a note about this issue, but perhaps it would help to have a
comment in this section that "duplicate removal" is seen as optional.

3.2 Removeflag Action

- Example contains :globalflags , But :globalflags isn't defined anywhere in
the document.  I remember it from the old revisions, did it get dropped?  If
so this example is now out of date...

- If duplicate removal is "optional", then what happens if we have two
flags, and we are asked to removeflag that flag.  We remove both
occurrences?  Would it perhaps just be easier to say that we MUST do
duplicate removal during addflags?  Both removal of existing duplicates
before we add the new flags, and any new duplicates created after adding the
flags?

- Don't understand what "Multiple occurrences of removeflag are treated
additively." means.  Does that mean multiple removeflag actions are treated
additively, or does it refer to the content of the flags and answer my
previous question about when multiple flags exist with the same name?

10. Extended Example

- Extended example contains a few "add" actions that I think should be
"addflags".

- Suggest that you don't use a variable name of  "flags" in the example, as
it may confuse.  Maybe "MyFlags" or something might be safer?

Cheers

Nigel

From: Bart Schaefer <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2003 03:50:41 +0000
Comments: In reply to "Matthew Elvey (FM)" <[email-masked]> "Quizzic: Spam equivalent to EICAR test virus proposal." (Jun 30,  3:08pm)
To: [email-masked]
Subject: Re: Quizzic: Spam equivalent to EICAR test virus proposal.
Sender: [email-masked]

Just for comparison:

SpamAssassin defines what's called the Generic Test for Unsolicited Bulk
Email (GTUBE).  It's defined as a string matching the regular expression

XJS\*C4JDBQADN1\.NSBN3\*2IDNEN\*GTUBE-STANDARD-ANTI-UBE-TEST-EMAIL\*C\.34X

appearing anywhere in the message body, after decoding and HTML rendering.

(I write the regular expression rather than the string itself so that any
of you running spamassassin won't score this message at 1000 points.)

To: IETF-Announce: ;
CC: [email-masked]
From: [email-masked]
Reply-to: [email-masked]
Subject: I-D ACTION:draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt
Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2003 07:22:33 -0400
Sender: [email-masked]

--NextPart

A New Internet-Draft is available from the on-line Internet-Drafts directories.

	Title		: Sieve -- IMAP flag Extension
	Author(s)	: A. Melnikov
	Filename	: draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt
	Pages		: 7
	Date		: 2003-6-30
	
Recent discussions have shown that it is desirable to set different
[IMAP] flags on message delivery.  This can be done, for example,
by a Sieve interpreter that works as a part of a Mail Delivery
Agent.
This document describes an extension to the Sieve mail filtering
language for setting [IMAP] flags. The extension allows to set both
[IMAP] system flags and [IMAP] keywords.

A URL for this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt

To remove yourself from the IETF Announcement list, send a message to 
ietf-announce-request with the word unsubscribe in the body of the message.

Internet-Drafts are also available by anonymous FTP. Login with the username
"anonymous" and a password of your e-mail address. After logging in,
type "cd internet-drafts" and then
	"get draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt".

A list of Internet-Drafts directories can be found in
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html 
or ftp://ftp.ietf.org/ietf/1shadow-sites.txt

Internet-Drafts can also be obtained by e-mail.

Send a message to:
	[email-masked].
In the body type:
	"FILE /internet-drafts/draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt".
	
NOTE:	The mail server at ietf.org can return the document in
	MIME-encoded form by using the "mpack" utility.  To use this
	feature, insert the command "ENCODING mime" before the "FILE"
	command.  To decode the response(s), you will need "munpack" or
	a MIME-compliant mail reader.  Different MIME-compliant mail readers
	exhibit different behavior, especially when dealing with
	"multipart" MIME messages (i.e. documents which have been split
	up into multiple messages), so check your local documentation on
	how to manipulate these messages.

Below is the data which will enable a MIME compliant mail reader
implementation to automatically retrieve the ASCII version of the
Internet-Draft.

--NextPart
Content-Type: Multipart/Alternative; Boundary="OtherAccess"

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body;
	access-type="mail-server";
	server="[email-masked]"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID:	<[email-masked]>

ENCODING mime
FILE /internet-drafts/draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt

--OtherAccess
Content-Type: Message/External-body;
	name="draft-melnikov-sieve-imapflags-05.txt";
	site="ftp.ietf.org";
	access-type="anon-ftp";
	directory="internet-drafts"

Content-Type: text/plain
Content-ID:	<[email-masked]>

--OtherAccess--

--NextPart--