draft-ietf-sieve-3431bis-01.txt   draft-ietf-sieve-3431bis-02.txt 
Sieve Working Group W. Segmuller Sieve Working Group W. Segmuller
Internet Draft B. Leiba Internet-Draft B. Leiba
Obsoletes: 3431 (if approved) IBM T.J. Watson Research Center Obsoletes: 3431 (if approved) IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
Document: draft-ietf-sieve-3431bis-01.txt March 2005 Expires: May 21, 2006 November 17, 2005
Expires September 2005
Sieve Extension: Relational Tests Sieve Extension: Relational Tests
draft-ietf-sieve-3431bis-02
Status of this Document Status of this Memo
This document is an Internet-Draft and is subject to all provisions By submitting this Internet-Draft, each author represents that any
of Section 3 of RFC 3667. By submitting this Internet-Draft, each applicable patent or other IPR claims of which he or she is aware
author represents that any applicable patent or other IPR claims of have been or will be disclosed, and any of which he or she becomes
which he or she is aware have been or will be disclosed, and any of aware will be disclosed, in accordance with Section 6 of BCP 79.
which he or she become aware will be disclosed, in accordance with
RFC 3668.
Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that Task Force (IETF), its areas, and its working groups. Note that
other groups may also distribute working documents as other groups may also distribute working documents as Internet-
Internet-Drafts. Drafts.
Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference time. It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
material or to cite them other than as "work in progress." material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."
The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at The list of current Internet-Drafts can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt. http://www.ietf.org/ietf/1id-abstracts.txt.
The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at The list of Internet-Draft Shadow Directories can be accessed at
http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html. http://www.ietf.org/shadow.html.
This Internet-Draft will expire on September 16, 2005. This Internet-Draft will expire on May 21, 2006.
Copyright Notice Copyright Notice
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005). Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2005).
Abstract Abstract
This document describes the RELATIONAL extension to the Sieve mail This document describes the RELATIONAL extension to the Sieve mail
filtering language defined in RFC 3028. This extension extends filtering language defined in RFC 3028. This extension extends
existing conditional tests in Sieve to allow relational operators. existing conditional tests in Sieve to allow relational operators.
Internet DRAFT Sieve Extension: Relational Tests March 2005
In addition to testing their content, it also allows for testing of In addition to testing their content, it also allows for testing of
the number of entities in header and envelope fields. the number of entities in header and envelope fields.
Meta-information on this document Note
This information is intended to facilitate discussion. It will be
removed when this document leaves the Internet-Draft stage.
This document is intended to be an update to the existing This document is intended to be an update to the existing
"relational" extension to the Sieve mail filtering language, "relational" extension to the Sieve mail filtering language,
available from the RFC repository as available from the RFC repository as
<ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3431.txt>. ftp://ftp.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3431.txt.
This document and the Sieve language itself are being discussed on This document and the Sieve language itself are being discussed on
the MTA Filters mailing list at <mailto:ietf-mta-filters@imc.org>. the MTA Filters mailing list at mailto:ietf-mta-filters@imc.org.
Subscription requests can be sent to Subscription requests can be sent to
<mailto:ietf-mta-filters-request@imc.org?body=subscribe> (send an mailto:ietf-mta-filters-request@imc.org?body=subscribe (send an email
email message with the word "subscribe" in the body). More message with the word "subscribe" in the body). More information on
information on the mailing list along with a WWW archive of back the mailing list along with a WWW archive of back messages is
messages is available at <http://www.imc.org/ietf-mta-filters/>. available at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mta-filters/.
Conventions used in this document Table of Contents
1. Conventions used in this document . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
3. Comparators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
4. Match Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.1 Match Type VALUE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
4.2 Match Type COUNT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
5. Interaction With Other Sieve Actions . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
6. Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
7. Extended Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
8. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.1 Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
10.2 Non-Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Authors' Addresses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
Intellectual Property and Copyright Statements . . . . . . . 14
1. Conventions used in this document
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
"SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this
document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119. document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119.
Conventions for notations are as in [SIEVE] section 1.1, including Conventions for notations are as in [Sieve] section 1.1, including
the use of [KEYWORDS] and "Syntax:" label for the definition of the use of [Kwds] and the use of [ABNF].
action and tagged arguments syntax, and the use of [ABNF].
The capability string associated with extension defined in this
document is "relational".
1. Introduction 2. Introduction
Sieve [SIEVE] is a language for filtering e-mail messages at the time [Sieve] is a language for filtering e-mail messages at the time of
of final delivery. It is designed to be implementable on either a final delivery. It is designed to be implementable on either a mail
mail client or mail server. It is meant to be extensible, simple, client or mail server. It is meant to be extensible, simple, and
and independent of access protocol, mail architecture, and operating independent of access protocol, mail architecture, and operating
system. It is suitable for running on a mail server where users may system. It is suitable for running on a mail server where users may
not be allowed to execute arbitrary programs, such as on black box not be allowed to execute arbitrary programs, such as on black box
Internet Messages Access Protocol (IMAP) servers, as it has no Internet Messages Access Protocol (IMAP) servers, as it has no
variables, loops, nor the ability to shell out to external programs. variables, loops, nor the ability to shell out to external programs.
The RELATIONAL extension provides relational operators on the The RELATIONAL extension provides relational operators on the
Internet DRAFT Sieve Extension: Relational Tests March 2005
address, envelope, and header tests. This extension also provides a address, envelope, and header tests. This extension also provides a
way of counting the entities in a message header or address field. way of counting the entities in a message header or address field.
With this extension, the sieve script may now determine if a field is With this extension, the Sieve script may now determine if a field is
greater than or less than a value instead of just equivalent. One greater than or less than a value instead of just equivalent. One
use is for the x-priority field: move messages with a priority use is for the x-priority field: move messages with a priority
greater than 3 to the "work on later" folder. Mail could also be greater than 3 to the "work on later" folder. Mail could also be
sorted by the from address. Those userids that start with 'a'-'m' go sorted by the from address. Those userids that start with 'a'-'m' go
to one folder, and the rest go to another folder. to one folder, and the rest go to another folder.
The sieve script can also determine the number of fields in the The Sieve script can also determine the number of fields in the
header, or the number of addresses in a recipient field. For header, or the number of addresses in a recipient field. For
example: are there more than 5 addresses in the to and cc fields. example: are there more than 5 addresses in the to and cc fields.
2. Comparators The capability string associated with the extension defined in this
document is "relational".
3. Comparators
This document does not define any comparators or exempt any This document does not define any comparators or exempt any
comparators from the require clause. Any comparator used, other than comparators from the require clause. Any comparator used must be
"i;octet" and "i;ascii-casemap", MUST be declared a require clause as treated as defined in [Sieve].
defined in [SIEVE].
The "i;ascii-numeric" comparator, as defined in [ACAP], MUST be The "i;ascii-numeric" comparator, as defined in [Comp], MUST be
supported for any implementation of this extension. The comparator supported for any implementation of this extension. The comparator
"i;ascii-numeric" MUST support at least 32 bit unsigned integers. "i;ascii-numeric" MUST support at least 32 bit unsigned integers.
Larger integers MAY be supported. Note: the "i;ascii-numeric" Larger integers MAY be supported. Note: the "i;ascii-numeric"
comparator does not support negative numbers. comparator does not support negative numbers.
3. Match Type 4. Match Types
This document defines two new match types. They are the VALUE match This document defines two new match types. They are the VALUE match
type and the COUNT match type. type and the COUNT match type.
The syntax is: The syntax is:
MATCH-TYPE =/ COUNT / VALUE MATCH-TYPE =/ COUNT / VALUE
COUNT = ":count" relational-match COUNT = ":count" relational-match
VALUE = ":value" relational-match VALUE = ":value" relational-match
relational-match = DQUOTE ( "gt" / "ge" / "lt" relational-match = DQUOTE
/ "le" / "eq" / "ne" ) DQUOTE ("gt" / "ge" / "lt" / "le" / "eq" / "ne") DQUOTE
; "gt" means "greater than", the C operator ">". ; "gt" means "greater than", the C operator ">".
; "ge" means "greater than or equal", the C operator ">=". ; "ge" means "greater than or equal", the C operator ">=".
; "lt" means "less than", the C operator "<". ; "lt" means "less than", the C operator "<".
; "le" means "less than or equal", the C operator "<=". ; "le" means "less than or equal", the C operator "<=".
Internet DRAFT Sieve Extension: Relational Tests March 2005
; "eq" means "equal to", the C operator "==". ; "eq" means "equal to", the C operator "==".
; "ne" means "not equal to", the C operator "!=". ; "ne" means "not equal to", the C operator "!=".
3.1. Match Type Value 4.1 Match Type VALUE
The VALUE match type does a relational comparison between strings. The VALUE match type does a relational comparison between strings.
The VALUE match type may be used with any comparator which returns The VALUE match type may be used with any comparator which returns
sort information. sort information.
Leading and trailing white space MUST be removed from the value of
the message for the comparison. White space is defined as
SP / HTAB / CRLF
A value from the message is considered the left side of the relation. A value from the message is considered the left side of the relation.
A value from the test expression, the key-list for address, envelope, A value from the test expression, the key-list for address, envelope,
and header tests, is the right side of the relation. and header tests, is the right side of the relation.
If there are multiple values on either side or both sides, the test If there are multiple values on either side or both sides, the test
is considered true, if any pair is true. is considered true if any pair is true.
3.2. Match Type Count 4.2 Match Type COUNT
The COUNT match type first determines the number of the specified The COUNT match type first determines the number of the specified
entities in the message and does a relational comparison of the entities in the message and does a relational comparison of the
number of entities to the values specified in the test expression. number of entities, as defined below to the values specified in the
test expression.
The COUNT match type SHOULD only be used with numeric comparators. The COUNT match type SHOULD only be used with numeric comparators.
The Address Test counts the number of recipients in the specified The Address Test counts the number of addresses (the number of
fields. Group names are ignored. "mailbox" elements, as defined in [RFC2822]) in the specified fields.
The Envelope Test counts the number of recipients in the specified Group names are ignored, but the contained mailboxes are counted.
The Envelope Test counts the number of addresses in the specified
envelope parts. The envelope "to" will always have only one entry, envelope parts. The envelope "to" will always have only one entry,
which is the address of the user for whom the sieve script is which is the address of the user for whom the Sieve script is
running. There is no way a sieve script can determine if the message running. There is no way a Sieve script can determine if the message
was actually sent to someone else using this test. The envelope was actually sent to someone else using this test. The envelope
"from" will be 0 if the MAIL FROM is blank, or 1 if MAIL FROM is not "from" will be 0 if the MAIL FROM is empty, or 1 if MAIL FROM is not
blank. empty.
The Header Test counts the total number of instances of the specified The Header Test counts the total number of instances of the specified
fields. This does not count individual addresses in the "to", "cc", fields. This does not count individual addresses in the "to", "cc",
and other recipient fields. and other recipient fields.
In all cases, if more than one field name is specified, the counts In all cases, if more than one field name is specified, the counts
for all specified fields are added together to obtain the number for for all specified fields are added together to obtain the number for
Internet DRAFT Sieve Extension: Relational Tests March 2005
comparison. Thus, specifying ["to", "cc"] in an address COUNT test, comparison. Thus, specifying ["to", "cc"] in an address COUNT test,
comparing the total number of "to" and "cc" addresses; if separate compares the total number of "to" and "cc" addresses; if separate
counts are desired, they must be done in two comparisons, perhaps counts are desired, they must be done in two comparisons, perhaps
joined by "allof" or "anyof". joined by "allof" or "anyof".
4. Example 5. Interaction With Other Sieve Actions
This specification adds two match types. The VALUE match type only
works with comparators that return sort information. The COUNT match
type only makes sense with numeric comparators.
There is no interaction with any other Sieve operations, nor with any
known extensions. In particular, this specification has no effect on
implicit KEEP, nor on any explicit message actions.
6. Example
Using the message: Using the message:
received: ... received: ...
received: ... received: ...
subject: example subject: example
to: foo@example.com.invalid, baz@example.com.invalid to: foo@example.com, baz@example.com
cc: qux@example.com.invalid cc: qux@example.com
The test: The test:
address :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" address :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["to", "cc"] ["3"] ["to", "cc"] ["3"]
would be true and the test would evaluate to true and the test
anyof ( address :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" anyof ( address :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["to"] ["3"], ["to"] ["3"],
address :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" address :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["cc"] ["3"] ) ["cc"] ["3"] )
would be false. would evaluate to false.
To check the number of received fields in the header, the following To check the number of received fields in the header, the following
test may be used: test may be used:
header :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" header :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["received"] ["3"] ["received"] ["3"]
This would return false. But This would evaluate to false. But
header :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" header :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["received", "subject"] ["3"] ["received", "subject"] ["3"]
would return true. would evaluate to true.
The test: The test:
header :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" header :count "ge" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["to", "cc"] ["3"] ["to", "cc"] ["3"]
will always return false on an RFC 2822 compliant message [RFC2822], will always evaluate to false on an RFC 2822 compliant message
[RFC2822], since a message can have at most one "to" field and at
Internet DRAFT Sieve Extension: Relational Tests March 2005 most one "cc" field. This test counts the number of fields, not the
number of addresses.
since a message can have at most one "to" field and at most one "cc"
field. This test counts the number of fields, not the number of
addresses.
5. Extended Example 7. Extended Example
require ["relational", "comparator-i;ascii-numeric"]; require ["relational", "comparator-i;ascii-numeric", "fileinto"];
if header :value "lt" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" if header :value "lt" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["x-priority"] ["3"] ["x-priority"] ["3"]
{ {
fileinto "Priority"; fileinto "Priority";
} }
elseif address :count "gt" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" elsif address :count "gt" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["to"] ["5"] ["to"] ["5"]
{ {
# everything with more than 5 recipients in the "to" field # everything with more than 5 recipients in the "to" field
# is considered SPAM # is considered SPAM
fileinto "SPAM"; fileinto "SPAM";
} }
elseif address :value "gt" :all :comparator "i;ascii-casemap" elsif address :value "gt" :all :comparator "i;ascii-casemap"
["from"] ["M"] ["from"] ["M"]
{ {
fileinto "From N-Z"; fileinto "From N-Z";
} else { } else {
fileinto "From A-M"; fileinto "From A-M";
} }
if allof ( address :count "eq" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric" if allof ( address :count "eq" :comparator "i;ascii-numeric"
["to", "cc"] ["1"] , ["to", "cc"] ["1"] ,
address :all :comparator "i;ascii-casemap" address :all :comparator "i;ascii-casemap"
["to", "cc"] ["me@foo.example.com.invalid"] ["to", "cc"] ["me@foo.example.com"] )
{ {
fileinto "Only me"; fileinto "Only me";
} }
6. IANA Considerations 8. IANA Considerations
This document requests that the IANA update the entry for the This document requests that the IANA update the entry for the
"relational" Sieve extension to point to this document. "relational" Sieve extension to point to this document.
7. Security Considerations 9. Security Considerations
Security considerations are discussed in [SIEVE].
Internet DRAFT Sieve Extension: Relational Tests March 2005
An implementation MUST ensure that the test for envelope "to" only An implementation MUST ensure that the test for envelope "to" only
reflects the delivery to the current user. It MUST not be possible reflects the delivery to the current user. It MUST not be possible
for a user to determine if this message was delivered to someone else for a user to determine if this message was delivered to someone else
using this test. using this test.
8. Normative References Additional security considerations are discussed in [Sieve].
[SIEVE]; Showalter, T.; "Sieve: A Mail Filtering Language"; RFC 3028; 10. References
January 2001.
[Keywords]; Bradner, S.; "Key words for use in RFCs to 10.1 Normative References
IndicateRequirement Levels"; BCP 14; RFC 2119; March 1997.
[ABNF]; Crocker, D.; "Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF"; [ABNF] Crocker, D., Ed. and P. Overell, "Augmented BNF for Syntax
RFC 2234; November 1997. Specifications: ABNF", RFC 4234, November 1997.
[RFC2822]; Resnick, P.; "Internet Message Format"; RFC 2822; April [Kwds] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
2001. Requirement Levels", RFC 2119, March 1997.
9. Non-Normative References [RFC2822] Resnick, P., "Internet Message Format", RFC 2822,
April 2001.
[ACAP]; Newman, C. and J. G. Myers; "ACAP -- Application [Sieve] Guenther, P. and T. Showalter, "Sieve: An Email Filtering
Configuration Access Protocol"; RFC 2244; November 1997. Language", I-D draft-ietf-sieve-3028bis, July 2005.
10. Authors' Addresses 10.2 Non-Normative References
[Comp] Newman, C., Duerst, M., and A. Gulbrandsen, "Internet
Application Protocol Collation Registry",
I-D draft-newman-i18n-comparator, September 2005.
Authors' Addresses
Wolfgang Segmuller Wolfgang Segmuller
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
19 Skyline Drive 19 Skyline Drive
Hawthorne, NY 10532 Hawthorne, NY 10532
US
Phone: 1-914-784-7408 Phone: +1 914 784 7408
Email: whs@watson.ibm.com Email: werewolf@us.ibm.com
Barry Leiba Barry Leiba
IBM T.J. Watson Research Center IBM T.J. Watson Research Center
19 Skyline Drive 19 Skyline Drive
Hawthorne, NY 10532 Hawthorne, NY 10532
US
Phone: 1-914-784-7941 Phone: +1 914 784 7941
Email: leiba@watson.ibm.com Email: leiba@watson.ibm.com
Internet DRAFT Sieve Extension: Relational Tests March 2005
Intellectual Property Statement Intellectual Property Statement
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any
Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to
pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in
this document or the extent to which any license under such rights this document or the extent to which any license under such rights
might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has
made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information
on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be on the procedures with respect to rights in RFC documents can be
found in BCP 78 and BCP 79. found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
 End of changes. 63 change blocks. 
118 lines changed or deleted 134 lines changed or added

This html diff was produced by rfcdiff 1.27, available from http://www.levkowetz.com/ietf/tools/rfcdiff/