Subject: vacation and address comparisons

From: Cyrus Daboo <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 13:17:16 -0500

The vacation action has an addresses parameter that can be used to indicate 
other addresses that belong to the current user. There is currently an 
ambiguity as to how address comparisons for that parameter should be done: 
are they case-sensitive or case-insensitive on the local part? Default 
base-spec SIEVE address comparisons are case-insensitive since 
i;ascii-casemap is used as the default comparator.

I see several possibilities to this:

1) vacation address comparisons are implementation defined: implementations 
know whether they do case-sensitive or case-insensitive address matches on 
delivery so they pick the appropriate comparator. Some statement of that 
should be in the spec.

2) vacation addresses are explicitly defined either case-sensitive or 
case-insensitive on the local part - we have to pick which and state in the 
spec.

3) A new comparator argument is added to the addresses parameter to allow a 
comparator to be explicitly chosen - we would have to pick the default in 
the absence of that argument.

Any comments on this?

-- 
Cyrus Daboo

---

From: Kjetil Torgrim Homme <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2003 23:02:08 +0100

On Mon, 2003-12-15 at 19:17, Cyrus Daboo wrote:
> [good catch snipped]

but the case sensitive system may have expanded the alias and forwarded
it to a different host which isn't.

> case-insensitive on the local part - we have to pick which and state in the 

it would have to be case-sensitive, wouldn't it?  it's possible to
simulate case-insensitivity, however awkward it is, the reverse is not
true.

> the absence of that argument.

I think this is the Correct(tm) solution.
-- 
Kjetil T.