Subject: Review of draft-ietf-sieve-refuse-reject-03

From: Randall Gellens <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 1 Aug 2006 18:49:16 -0700

My comments on -02 apply to -03, with one extra:

Is the exacttext option worth it?  It seems to be adding a lot of 
complexity for fairly small gain.  I understand users wanting to put 
reject reasons in their native language.  However, the intent of this 
draft is that reject will operate at the SMTP level wherever 
possible.  Hence, the reject reason should be very short and must be 
usable in an SMTP response.  Use of ASCII is best for 
interoperability.  Use of UTF-8 will only work when EAI extensions 
are also being used, or when MDNs are being generated instead of SMTP 
protocol responses.  Since EAI is new, I don't think we want to rely 
on it.  And the intent is to get away from MDNs.  Hence, we should 
encourage brevity and mandate ASCII.

Once EAI extensions are deployed we can extend reject to permit UTF-8.
-- 
Randall Gellens
Opinions are personal;    facts are suspect;    I speak for myself only
-------------- Randomly-selected tag: ---------------
There are two ways to write error-free programs;
only the third one works.