Re: [apps-discuss] Mail client configuration via something, maybe WebFinger

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Wed, 10 February 2016 21:46 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A50791B305B for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:46:40 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id qV9_hOZFr2z1 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:46:39 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-pf0-x232.google.com (mail-pf0-x232.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c00::232]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F306F1B3059 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:46:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id q63so18343052pfb.0 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:46:38 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to:references:subject :mime-version:content-type; bh=xFzDkx3lXlwYg2NHE60JhhdIR6B3BKjrRDLQyqx8t4E=; b=yeDNkLHF/gitqGCOh/Wlmkmf/Dfs/rnOVX6Ul4KZf9e1Pa2Nc8rhjBh7oG+Bf0MmkS Vh4xAnfrJQ07OkVbgSuUNvLFHFTRIuuIIP4fT+dLr9UGC+slnBrWvi1rqKZ1F6ozO4Pt ccLVqSLL2l2tgdXpkPVbTIk6SUQpQOyLGftStPmVOkstV2ZMGpjwM9K6uKzDMwLeesUm EOV1/n4CiUCNEhjCl16WYeJxFZj68J3zsjErbsbA5Fi+2wQW8q1sblu5uFkp3vY5GcGg oiyjD2teqTXTCDw4MvjBP0EQg6nMVdmEPhXGQ6+E9Aswh9mWYWDjNUf5LXFJmyYoVlA8 u7aA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:date:from:to:message-id:in-reply-to :references:subject:mime-version:content-type; bh=xFzDkx3lXlwYg2NHE60JhhdIR6B3BKjrRDLQyqx8t4E=; b=RFIPJgo99t02VDUV2Bs3I0KJlDl6CzNZ7KVS6JrSsZynyLkA3Bfs9hqTNnMILqTuf9 HDLuvWw1DwbSI99QHmOioqa48IcwLSRFcfrdEJ7K8mxGJVQC17IRhTz1yHs4n0H6D+Ix +WcCAop9pVCIV27KLvdYoIcsWwF90vKOLutUG+Zzqit2d1J6BPdUMynh0YMwbnbf7puH QFMrHOsmQhC1Z063DCrPLniUARh419CPrUyIO1LskuJ8azf8cYqaWCoxyQm3AvDUKA4k Nvhue7gW64Pmm77YxcllNzf6APBiRUEr0zWWhdcOynbTY1BuwWrO6KsYiOcF8fN8WnaH yn8g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOShKUSZBm5CsWbee2RJdKHKEHKFe4ebrB+7tXrOKGQS/UVRj2p0/q01AzjI1F+ohQ==
X-Received: by 10.98.72.202 with SMTP id q71mr61546842pfi.69.1455140798703; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:46:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.outlook.com (ec2-52-24-139-88.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com. [52.24.139.88]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id r145sm7327552pfr.59.2016.02.10.13.46.35 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 10 Feb 2016 13:46:35 -0800 (PST)
Sender: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:46:34 +0000 (UTC)
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
To: <apps-discuss@ietf.org>, John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
Message-ID: <994C5976EA09B556.2633D77B-A5B3-40D2-841E-A004F2B11220@mail.outlook.com>
In-Reply-To: <20160210201701.1725.qmail@ary.lan>
References: <5e3d7843-b3c8-4baa-b2da-2683fc36df84@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <20160210201701.1725.qmail@ary.lan>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_7473_965378063.1455140794463"
X-Mailer: Outlook for iOS and Android
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/1x3YCaOOnz0sftVGl3qmWXVX7t4>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Mail client configuration via something, maybe WebFinger
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 21:46:41 -0000

The complexity of the Netscape protocol from 1997 is only partly due to the complexity of the problem. 
The much bigger problem is the architecture. An email account config is ultimately going to end up in some sort of file/registry setting. And so it is going to be a collection of structured data. 
The way we go about that problem today is to write an XML schema or a description of a JSON structure (which is of course a schema but we don't call it that as it frightens the horses). Then we poke or pull data blobs that contain data structures according to the schema. All the complexity of the problem goes into the schema design. And so do any extensions to meet future needs, proprietary purposes, etc. etc.
The Netscape protocol isn't written that way. The complexity that these days we contain in the schema has escaped into the network protocol which is loosely speaking a mechanism for editing the data structure by sending diffs for each branch.
So, I think it is a distraction and not very helpful.

The Mesh follows the schema approach but with layers of cryptography to protect confidentiality and integrity. There may be common network config elements that should be shared by email and xmpp config for example. In fact I am sure there are or we are doing something wrong.