Re: [dtn] draft-blanchet-dtn-email-over-bp-00.txt

Why not BSMTP using CFDP ?

-Jorge

> On Jan 17, 2023, at 5:48 PM, Stephen Farrell <stephen.farrell@cs.tcd.ie> wrote:
> 
> 
> Hiya,
> 
>> On 17/01/2023 23:37, Marc Blanchet wrote:
>> Cool. But a drawback to me is that it seems that the solution you are
>> describing is a bit implementation specific. I was trying pretty hard
>> to stick to protocols, so it is more clean and interoperable. Our
>> goal, as a community, now is to standardize stuff to achieve a high
>> level of interoperability.  And includes the assignment of a service
>> number so all implementations expect the same payload at the same
>> place...
> 
> Yeah, but.... I'd argue there really are a pile of reasons to
> prefer an architecture where one uses the DTN to sync message
> stores over one where one tries to do SMTP/BP. Just to pick
> two: there was no chance I could convince our email admins to
> run any BP stuff, but syncing message stores doesn't require
> that permission, and secondly, I could configure which mails
> from my normal email a/c to forward into the DTN. That kind
> of discussion is better f2f with whiteboard of course so may
> be one for an upcoming IETF meeting.
> 
> Yes, what we did was implementation specific, but I'd bet one
> could do something with SIEVE or IMAP that was standardised.
> (That said, our implementation was really to commit all the
> files in each to-by-sync'd Maildir folder to a mercurial repo
> (IIRC) and to then encapsulate the ``hg diff``'s in bundles
> so yeah, there was a big element of just doing what worked
> but the diff thing was significantly better and e.g. even
> handled cases where a mail was moved between folders as well
> as read/forwarded flags, which are important.)
> 
> Architecturally, I guess one could start by asking if one is
> trying to make SMTP or mailboxes available to users who are
> in challenged regions of the DTN. I guess I'd argue the
> latter is far more useful.
> 
>> Having said that, I would love to get the info. Have you done an
>> internet-draft describing it.
> 
> Sorry, no. I can probably try dig up some paper but forget
> how much implementation detail we documented. Will look in
> the morning (here:-)
> 
> Cheers,
> S.
> 
> <OpenPGP_0x5AB2FAF17B172BEA.asc>
> _______________________________________________
> dtn mailing list
> dtn@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dtn