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

Doug Royer <douglasroyer@gmail.com> Wed, 10 February 2016 19:10 UTC

Return-Path: <douglasroyer@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 6A3B61B2EDE for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:10:52 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=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 4WpLScGmj9Gv for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:10:50 -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 B6E9A1B2ED7 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:10:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-pf0-x232.google.com with SMTP id q63so16443888pfb.0 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:10:50 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=subject:to:references:from:organization:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=ETz0n5Q5xPzIqlWzwxdQE7Imxlk36bnPhhsstTahZ0w=; b=1D2OTSxStxhQuFdaDFzNIDw9ZS/1YLC0ocvnhzflyzQx4A5y5rBmNig+qxo/lkX6SY SzQYNfqnUq7MKsITyOinXIipKC0zA4+UkQhz1aYOpBCpYZr41sDZoUngTVhSiMMInNWy S/T93MVAnqbOTVlodlOqXzpfvs5vPSO6ycMSABVHmDCNTzBP2sAgACMK55n7w2wAps0F KKyJ8p/Qas47mdUsgoYd5WdyBc0wRGtYQOsB9MdFS/YusYjPmcXCuQFQnPCR0X2CVn11 rlXM/N9E07jDx5x+R6hc7FN2Rj32wfilZPSYFC8lZiKcu08eVeBIz72IBRgeWPN+ZYDY 7Vrw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:from:organization :message-id:date:user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-type; bh=ETz0n5Q5xPzIqlWzwxdQE7Imxlk36bnPhhsstTahZ0w=; b=Ud86v5CLI5bBEmjtTFQ35jWL35UeikF3GZJgCksGZ4gC0QARZsezJb54hwZjrlmcwd S1Vs1l+AabmLMMjuPFL3E2d/cLpS9hAqWzLbFMgzptkHEzhxzafBEDCvoVTEio3ennhA UqXzTWOTUjKKwUpDwJRz5o/McR1c1RhkOP4tJJEPfpaGJBCH1t3MTs/l2tcPn/k95AyM e2s+JBvaVzdPzfa0d7zcPE6BPyJNeZiU5IPEyVWN59A/jnIZ/Nr5qNYswKQdVJxoSlPm R+A+2EOT8bJyZa2vaRtg1ljNTfqXmF+LjfcETbA9EOf9WNIRIHbpb1PsyJ5EgEgRJPa/ 1uyQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQg/oJOivU/tcFRNr9+D1Lxrl8mWBIvDXbdR6sOXN6++50dZ6HwVIWArFGdnysVQw==
X-Received: by 10.98.33.135 with SMTP id o7mr60219342pfj.158.1455131450380; Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:10:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.4] (184-99-102-85.boid.qwest.net. [184.99.102.85]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id wh9sm6948805pab.8.2016.02.10.11.10.49 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org> (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 10 Feb 2016 11:10:49 -0800 (PST)
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
References: <20160210181822.1369.qmail@ary.lan>
From: Doug Royer <douglasroyer@gmail.com>
Organization: http://SoftwareAndServices.NET
Message-ID: <56BB8B39.4080408@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 12:10:49 -0700
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.5.1
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <20160210181822.1369.qmail@ary.lan>
Content-Type: multipart/signed; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha-256; boundary="------------ms020405060107090205080008"
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/4qxl-sALn7RTwPYi3weJtqpDSJA>
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 19:10:52 -0000

On 02/10/2016 11:18 AM, John Levine wrote:


> PS:
> 
>> That ISP considers the 'preferred' service IMAP.
>> You can connect with IMAP, but get no email if you expected the free
>> service.
> 
> We definitely can't cure stupid.

Different issue. They provide 2 services POP-free and IMAP-pay, and
DNS/SRV has no way to do smart 'preferred'. (per user again)

If they make IMAP preferred, then their free users get no email.

If they make POP preferred, then their pay users get told to use POP and
not the IMAP they pay for.

RFC 6186:

section 3.4,  " ...When an MUA supports both IMAP and POP3, it SHOULD
retrieve records for both services and then use the service with the
lowest priority value. ..."

  and first paragraph on page 2

"...  The priority field of the SRV record can also be used to indicate
a preference for one message store access protocol over another. ...


For users that upgrade, would have to manually update their MUA.

I would hope that a configuration standard would allow for update data
that does not tell them to use the wrong store/port.

They choose the option that makes their per-users happy.

-- 

Doug Royer - (http://DougRoyer.US)
DouglasRoyer@gmail.com
714-989-6135