Skip to main content

Sieve Email Filtering: Extension for Notifications
RFC 5435

Revision differences

Document history

Date Rev. By Action
2015-10-14
12 (System) Notify list changed from sieve-chairs@ietf.org, draft-ietf-sieve-notify@ietf.org to (None)
2012-08-22
12 (System) post-migration administrative database adjustment to the No Objection position for Cullen Jennings
2009-02-02
12 Cindy Morgan State Changes to RFC Published from RFC Ed Queue by Cindy Morgan
2009-02-02
12 Cindy Morgan [Note]: 'RFC 5435' added by Cindy Morgan
2009-01-31
12 (System) RFC published
2008-02-06
12 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2008-02-06
12 Amy Vezza State Changes to Approved-announcement sent from RFC Ed Queue by Amy Vezza
2008-02-06
12 Amy Vezza State Changes to RFC Ed Queue from Approved-announcement sent by Amy Vezza
2008-02-01
12 (System) IANA Action state changed to RFC-Ed-Ack from Waiting on RFC Editor
2008-02-01
12 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on RFC Editor from In Progress
2008-02-01
12 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress from Waiting on Authors
2008-01-30
12 (System) IANA Action state changed to Waiting on Authors from In Progress
2008-01-29
12 Amy Vezza IESG state changed to Approved-announcement sent
2008-01-29
12 Amy Vezza IESG has approved the document
2008-01-29
12 Amy Vezza Closed "Approve" ballot
2008-01-29
12 (System) IANA Action state changed to In Progress
2008-01-15
12 Lisa Dusseault State Changes to Approved-announcement to be sent from IESG Evaluation::AD Followup by Lisa Dusseault
2007-12-31
12 Cullen Jennings [Ballot Position Update] Position for Cullen Jennings has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Cullen Jennings
2007-12-24
12 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2007-12-24
12 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-12.txt
2007-12-20
12 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR Completed. Reviewer: Sean Turner.
2007-12-20
12 Amy Vezza State Changes to IESG Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from IESG Evaluation by Amy Vezza
2007-12-20
12 Chris Newman
[Ballot comment]
In response to Cullen's discuss, it is possible to construct parameters
from message content using the Sieve variables extension, as the last
paragraph …
[Ballot comment]
In response to Cullen's discuss, it is possible to construct parameters
from message content using the Sieve variables extension, as the last
paragraph in the security considerations points out.  That paragraph
points out the need for URL encoding of the parameters, but does not
discuss the security implications of generating the address from
message content.  While I suspect most implementers/users would not be
foolish enough to do that, particularly because the syntax gets so
grotty, it wouldn't hurt to mention how dangerous that is.  One simple
remedy for the threat would be to simply disallow use of sieve variables
in the method parameter of the notify command via script analysis.  Note
that I would not discuss over this issue, but I do think a brief comment
on this issue in the security considerations would improve the document.

My previous comments:

An issue with nomenclature that I recommend fixing.  This document uses
the term "importance" with a completely different meaning from the
"importance" header in the Header Registry.  Indeed, in this document,
the term "importance" has the same meaning as the "priority" header in
the mail headers registry and the "urgency" header in the XMPP registry.
I would prefer this used consistent terminology.  I recommend ":urgency"
or ":priority" instead of ":importance".  I understand the change would
be annoying this late in the process given the notify XMPP document has
to be updated as well, which is why I'm not making this a discuss issue.
But please consider this seriously.

One nit.  The IANA registration template for notification mechanisms
(section 9.2) uses "Standards Track/IESG-approved experimental RFC
number:" in the template, but that registry uses the "Specification
Required" policy that does not require standards track processing
or IESG approval.  I suggest the template use "Permanent and readily
available reference:" to avoid confusion.
2007-12-20
12 Cullen Jennings [Ballot Position Update] Position for Cullen Jennings has been changed to Discuss from No Objection by Cullen Jennings
2007-12-20
12 Cullen Jennings [Ballot Position Update] Position for Cullen Jennings has been changed to No Objection from Discuss by Cullen Jennings
2007-12-20
12 Cullen Jennings
[Ballot discuss]
I would like to talk about the security properties of being able to extract the list of users to receive a notification message …
[Ballot discuss]
I would like to talk about the security properties of being able to extract the list of users to receive a notification message from the incoming email. The first thing I would like to understand is if this is really needed. Once we get a handle on this, I'd like to figure out how to add some text about security concerns for this. I realize this discuss is crappy but I felt this was better than deferring the document. Basic issues is I want to talk about this, and then decide if any update is needed.

Unless there is some cares where it should not be used, I would like to change "A notification SHOULD include means to identify / track" from a SHOULD to a MUST.

I think the draft should provide a little bit of semantics around the meaning of "online". (As a side note, I think "open" may be a better term than "online"). I can easily be talked out of this if there is a good reason not to.

I believe a tel URL would be more appropriate than the sms URL. This is more a topic for the SMS document.
2007-12-20
12 Cullen Jennings [Ballot Position Update] New position, Discuss, has been recorded by Cullen Jennings
2007-12-20
12 Magnus Westerlund [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Magnus Westerlund
2007-12-20
12 Jon Peterson [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jon Peterson
2007-12-20
12 Dan Romascanu [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Dan Romascanu
2007-12-20
12 Mark Townsley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Mark Townsley
2007-12-20
12 Chris Newman
[Ballot comment]
An issue with nomenclature that I recommend fixing.  This document uses
the term "importance" with a completely different meaning from the
"importance" header …
[Ballot comment]
An issue with nomenclature that I recommend fixing.  This document uses
the term "importance" with a completely different meaning from the
"importance" header in the Header Registry.  Indeed, in this document,
the term "importance" has the same meaning as the "priority" header in
the mail headers registry and the "urgency" header in the XMPP registry.
I would prefer this used consistent terminology.  I recommend ":urgency"
or ":priority" instead of ":importance".  I understand the change would
be annoying this late in the process given the notify XMPP document has
to be updated as well, which is why I'm not making this a discuss issue.
But please consider this seriously.

One nit.  The IANA registration template for notification mechanisms
(section 9.2) uses "Standards Track/IESG-approved experimental RFC
number:" in the template, but that registry uses the "Specification
Required" policy that does not require standards track processing
or IESG approval.  I suggest the template use "Permanent and readily
available reference:" to avoid confusion.
2007-12-20
12 Chris Newman [Ballot Position Update] Position for Chris Newman has been changed to No Objection from Yes by Chris Newman
2007-12-20
12 Ross Callon [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ross Callon
2007-12-19
12 David Ward [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by David Ward
2007-12-19
12 Russ Housley
[Ballot comment]
From Gen-ART Review by Pasi Eronen.

  The document effectively creates a new "name space" for
  notification-capability values, and defines a single …
[Ballot comment]
From Gen-ART Review by Pasi Eronen.

  The document effectively creates a new "name space" for
  notification-capability values, and defines a single value
  "online". Shouldn't this be included in the IANA
  considerations section, requesting IANA to maintain a
  registry for notification-capability values?
2007-12-19
12 Russ Housley [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Russ Housley
2007-12-19
12 Ron Bonica [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Ron Bonica
2007-12-19
12 Tim Polk [Ballot comment]
Sean Turner's secdir review raised some Last Call issues that merit further review.
2007-12-19
12 Tim Polk [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Tim Polk
2007-12-18
12 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] Position for Lars Eggert has been changed to No Objection from Undefined by Lars Eggert
2007-12-18
12 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] Position for Lars Eggert has been changed to Undefined from No Objection by Lars Eggert
2007-12-18
12 Lars Eggert [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Lars Eggert
2007-12-17
12 Sam Hartman [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Sam Hartman
2007-12-16
12 Jari Arkko [Ballot Position Update] New position, No Objection, has been recorded by Jari Arkko
2007-12-14
12 (System) Removed from agenda for telechat - 2007-12-13
2007-12-13
12 Chris Newman
[Ballot comment]
One nit.  The IANA registration template for notification mechanisms
(section 9.2) uses "Standards Track/IESG-approved experimental RFC
number:" in the template, but that registry …
[Ballot comment]
One nit.  The IANA registration template for notification mechanisms
(section 9.2) uses "Standards Track/IESG-approved experimental RFC
number:" in the template, but that registry uses the "Specification
Required" policy that does not require standards track processing
or IESG approval.  I suggest the template use "Permanent and readily
available reference:" to avoid confusion.
2007-12-13
12 Chris Newman [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded by Chris Newman
2007-12-09
12 Lisa Dusseault Placed on agenda for telechat - 2007-12-13 by Lisa Dusseault
2007-12-09
12 Lisa Dusseault State Changes to IESG Evaluation from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::AD Followup by Lisa Dusseault
2007-12-09
12 Lisa Dusseault [Ballot Position Update] New position, Yes, has been recorded for Lisa Dusseault
2007-12-09
12 Lisa Dusseault Ballot has been issued by Lisa Dusseault
2007-12-09
12 Lisa Dusseault Created "Approve" ballot
2007-12-06
12 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2007-12-06
11 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-11.txt
2007-11-27
12 Lisa Dusseault State Changes to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead::Revised ID Needed from Waiting for AD Go-Ahead by Lisa Dusseault
2007-11-23
12 (System) State has been changed to Waiting for AD Go-Ahead from In Last Call by system
2007-11-16
12 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Sean Turner
2007-11-16
12 Samuel Weiler Request for Last Call review by SECDIR is assigned to Sean Turner
2007-11-13
12 Amanda Baber
IANA Last Call comments:

Action 1:

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following assignments in the "Sieve Extensions" registry located at …
IANA Last Call comments:

Action 1:

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will make the following assignments in the "Sieve Extensions" registry located at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/sieve-extensions

Capability name: enotify
Description: adds the 'notify' action for notifying user about the
received message. It also provides two new test: valid_notify_method
checks notification URIs for validity; notify_method_capability can
check recipients capabilities.
RFC number: [RFC-sieve-notify-10]
Contact address:
The Sieve discussion list


Action 2:

NOTE: Registry has no registration procedures.

Upon approval of this document, the IANA will create the following
registry "Sieve Notification Mechanisms" located at
http://www.iana.org/assignments/TBD
Initial contents of this registry will be:

Registration Template:

To: iana@iana.org
Subject: Registration of new Sieve notification mechanism
Mechanism name: [the name of the mechanism]
Mechanism URI: [the RFC number of the document that defines the URI
used by this mechanism]
Mechanism-specific tags: [the names of any Sieve notify tags that are
specific to this mechanism, or "none"]
Standards Track/IESG-approved experimental RFC number: [the RFC
number of the document that defines this notification mechanism]
Person and email address to contact for further information: [the
name and email address of the technical contact for information about
this mechanism]


We understand the above to be the only IANA Actions for this document.
2007-11-09
12 Amy Vezza Last call sent
2007-11-09
12 Amy Vezza State Changes to In Last Call from Last Call Requested by Amy Vezza
2007-11-09
12 Lisa Dusseault Last Call was requested by Lisa Dusseault
2007-11-09
12 Lisa Dusseault State Changes to Last Call Requested from AD Evaluation::AD Followup by Lisa Dusseault
2007-11-09
12 (System) Ballot writeup text was added
2007-11-09
12 (System) Last call text was added
2007-11-09
12 (System) Ballot approval text was added
2007-11-09
12 (System) Sub state has been changed to AD Follow up from New Id Needed
2007-11-09
10 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-10.txt
2007-11-08
12 Lisa Dusseault State Changes to AD Evaluation::Revised ID Needed from Publication Requested by Lisa Dusseault
2007-10-16
12 Lisa Dusseault Draft Added by Lisa Dusseault in state Publication Requested
2007-10-05
09 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-09.txt
2007-07-06
08 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-08.txt
2007-02-21
07 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-07.txt
2007-02-01
06 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-06.txt
2006-11-30
05 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-05.txt
2006-10-20
04 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-04.txt
2006-06-26
03 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-03.txt
2006-02-06
02 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-02.txt
2005-10-18
01 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-01.txt
2005-09-26
00 (System) New version available: draft-ietf-sieve-notify-00.txt