Sieve Email Filtering: Vacation Extension
draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-07

[Ballot discuss]
+1 304 555 1212 is (or at least used to be) a valid phone number.n
Please follow the appropriate ITU recommendation for example phone
numbers; if we don't know what that is, we should ask Scott Bradner.

[Ballot comment]
Section 4.2: s/304 555 1212/+1 304 555 1212/

  Section 4.2: s/qpply the hash/apply the hash/

  Section 4.3: s/security check/validity check/

  Section 4.6: s/addresses that "vacation" MUST NOT send mail to/
                /addresses to which "vacation" MUST NOT send mail/

  Section 6: s/[RFC3834] makes in regards to how personal responders should behave/
              /of [RFC3834] regarding personal responder behavior/

AD evaluation comments:

Some questions and comments.  Please clue me in as appropriate:

Minor IDNit errors are noted in the tracker.  The shepherd write-up said that IDNits ran cleanly.  Hmm...

General comment: both "Sieve" and "sieve" are used in the document.  One form or the other should be used consistently.

First page:
The "??" characters used for Tim's organization need to be replaced.  To be honest I'm not sure if anything should be used at all if there is no know organization.

Section 4.1:
I'm curious about the "Sites MAY also define a maximum days value, which MUST be greater than 7, and SHOULD be greater than 30" text.  Why use a MUST for what appears to be an operational matter?  What is the impact on interoperability if a lesser value is used?

Section 4.2:  "Implementations are free to limit the number of remembered responses, provided the limit is no less than 1000."
Why 1000, and is this a normative requirement or not?

Section 4.7: "A script will fail if it attempts to execute two or more vacation actions."
Should "will" be either SHOULD or MUST?  "will" describes an implementation behavior.

idnits 1.81 (26 Sep 2005)

tmp/draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-04.txt:

tmp/draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-04.txt(239): Line has weird spacing: '... of the  messa...'
tmp/draft-ietf-sieve-vacation-04.txt(325): Line has weird spacing: '...set the  recor...'


  Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ID-Checklist.html:
   
    Checking conformance with RFC 3978/3979 boilerplate...

    the boilerplate looks good.
    No nits found.

  Checking nits according to http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-guidelines.txt:
    Nothing found here (but these checks do not cover all of
    1id-guidelines.txt yet).

  Miscellaneous warnings:
    None.

    No nits found.