The Sieve Mail-Filtering Language -- Extensions for Checking Mailbox Status and Accessing Mailbox Metadata
RFC 5490

Approval announcement
Draft of message to be sent after approval:

From: The IESG <iesg-secretary@ietf.org>
To: IETF-Announce <ietf-announce@ietf.org>
Cc: Internet Architecture Board <iab@iab.org>,
    RFC Editor <rfc-editor@rfc-editor.org>, 
    sieve mailing list <ietf-mta-filters@imc.org>, 
    sieve chair <sieve-chairs@tools.ietf.org>
Subject: Protocol Action: 'The Sieve mail filtering language - 
         extensions for checking mailbox status and accessing mailbox 
         metadata' to Proposed Standard 

The IESG has approved the following document:

- 'The Sieve mail filtering language - extensions for checking mailbox 
   status and accessing mailbox metadata '
   <draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-08.txt> as a Proposed Standard

This document is the product of the Sieve Mail Filtering Language Working 
Group. 

The IESG contact persons are Lisa Dusseault and Alexey Melnikov.

A URL of this Internet-Draft is:
http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-melnikov-sieve-imapext-metadata-08.txt

Technical Summary

The SIEVE mail filtering language - extension for accessing mailbox
metadata extension provides a way for a SIEVE script to test annotations
stored on an IMAP server supporting the METADATA extension.

Working Group Summary

This document has been discussed and reviewed in the SIEVE Working Group.
There is consensus in the Working Group to publish this document
as a Proposed Standard.

Document Quality

A number of implementors have expressed interest in this extension.

Personal

Document Shepherd: Cyrus Daboo <mailto:cyrus@daboo.name>
AD: Lisa Dusseault


Note to RFC Editor


In Abstract, add to the end of the sentence:

   , as well as for checking for mailbox existence and controlling
   mailbox creation on fileinto action

In Section 1, add the second paragraph that reads:

   This document also defines an extension for checking for mailbox
   existence and controlling mailbox creation on fileinto action.

In Section 5, add at the end of the second paragraph:

   For example, if the Sieve script is stored in LDAP and the script
   can't be retrieved when a message is processed, then the agent
   performing Sieve processing can, for example, assume that the script 
   doesn't exist, or delay message delivery until the script can be 
   retrieved successfully.  Annotations should be treated as if they 
   are a part of the script itself, so a temporary failure to retrieve 
   them should be handled in the same way as a temporary failure to 
   retrieve the Sieve script itself.

In Section 5, add at the end of the third paragraph:

   For example, if Sieve scripts are retrieved using LDAP secured with
TLS
   encryption, then the protocol used to retrieve annotations
   must use a comparable mechanism for providing connection
confidentiality.
   In particular the protocol used to retrieve annotations must not be
lacking encryption.