Subject: [Fwd: interest in the rules language]

From: Markus Hofmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 21 Feb 2005 07:53:44 -0500

[Forwarded email from Alex, who currently has problems posting to the 
OPES list].

Subject: interest in the rules language
From: "Alex Rousskov" <[email-masked]>
To: "Markus Hofmann" <[email-masked]>, "OPES Group" <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2005 23:02:48 -0700

On Sun, 2005/01/09 (MST), <[email-masked]> wrote:

> Alex Rousskov wrote:
>
>> Personally, I need to respond to Markus' call regarding desirable  
>> features  that Seive cannot support. I mentioned a couple in my  
>> original comparison,  but need to double check those and look for more,  
>> given the new Sieve  extension framework.
>
> Alex - do you think you'll get a chance any time sooo?
>
> Everyone - this is not just an issue that Alex should take on, eberyone  
> is invited to dig into the Sieve extensions and provide his/her opinion  
> and thoughts.

I did not see anybody digging in. At this point, I have to wonder if I am  
the only person left interested in the "common rules language" problem.  
Did we lose the momentum and interest on this topic? Does it make sense to  
continue working on rules (regardless of Seive versus P question)?

There were a few folks interested in the topic when the charter was  
discussed and before various (mostly IETF-imposed) delays put the topic on  
the backburner. Should we assume that those folks lost interest (due to  
delays or any other reason)?

We should probably discuss this question during the upcoming face-to-face  
meeting (I will not be in Minneapolis though).

Thank you,

Alex.

---

From: Markus Hofmann <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 09:03:19 -0500

Alex Rousskov wrote:

> I did not see anybody digging in. At this point, I have to wonder if I 
> am  the only person left interested in the "common rules language" 
> problem.  Did we lose the momentum and interest on this topic? Does it 
> make sense to  continue working on rules (regardless of Seive versus P 
> question)?
> 
> discussed and before various (mostly IETF-imposed) delays put the topic 
> on  the backburner. Should we assume that those folks lost interest (due 
> to  delays or any other reason)?

Folks - we need to know if anyone is still interested in this work. 
Doesn't make sense to drag this along without anyone working on it and 
without making real progress.

Could anyone interested in the rules language work please speak up, in 
particular the ones who expressed interest in contributing to the work 
when we re-charted (don't make me go back into the email archives to 
dig out the names... :). If we don't hear back, I recommend we fold 
this activity.

Thanks,
   Markus

---

From: "The Purple Streak, Hilarie Orman" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 08:57:39 -0700

I'll help write the draft on the rules language.  I'm very interested
in the work and believe it will have major influence on Internet
services.

Persistence is an important attribute in the IETF.  

Hilarie

---

From: jfcm <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 22 Feb 2005 17:05:24 +0100

At 15:03 22/02/2005, Markus Hofmann wrote:

>when we re-charted (don't make me go back into the email archives to dig 
>out the names... :). If we don't hear back, I recommend we fold this activity.

Obviously deeply interested. But before that I need to understand if the 
whole OPES/SMTP makes sense. I fully documented that I do not understand 
anything to the use case draft. The filtering rules are a major part, but 
they can be understood very differently at different location and for 
different purposes.

BTW has somebody a working experience of AskSam and/or an inner knowledge 
of their logic?
I am not familiar with fuzzy filtering either. Is there an IETF work to 
know there?
Thank you.
jfc

---

From: "Geetha Manjunath" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 23 Feb 2005 04:50:02 +0530

I am still interested in the rules language. I will participate in the
associated dicussions/reviews - but probably do not have the time to help in
writing one now. 

I'm sorry, I did want to do more than that, but cannot take it up now due to
the timing (almost waited 6 months!). 

Thanks and Regards,
Geetha

-----Original Message-----
From: [email-masked]
[mailto:[email-masked]] On Behalf Of Markus Hofmann
Sent: Tuesday, February 22, 2005 7:33 PM
To: OPES Group
Subject: Re: [Fwd: interest in the rules language]

Thanks,
   Markus