IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ?

Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca> Fri, 01 March 2019 22:48 UTC

Return-Path: <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
X-Original-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: extra@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9508D130F4C for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 14:48:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.901
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.901 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
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 d0C0GVmVq1JH for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 14:48:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orthanc.ca (orthanc.ca [208.79.93.154]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 15269130F67 for <extra@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 14:48:58 -0800 (PST)
Received: from orthanc.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by orthanc.ca (OpenSMTPD) with ESMTP id 67c1a209 for <extra@ietf.org>; Fri, 1 Mar 2019 14:48:55 -0800 (PST)
From: Lyndon Nerenberg <lyndon@orthanc.ca>
to: extra@ietf.org
In-reply-to: <AKMk6mFEu9kvnOxeceBB+vNAqqDJDq2Ha2enPbOCdtQ=.sha-256@antelope.email>
References: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1902262150050.14048@ary.local> <af25a165-ff24-41d4-810e-b00adf2092d5@beta.fastmail.com> <01R3P86JVOOM00004L@mauve.mrochek.com> <a05121fb-a105-458a-bd69-9d6c289860b2@www.fastmail.com> <20190228015702.5B252200F6CDEE@ary.local> <8ce7f4bf-805d-4fbe-8854-5381a4346b2a@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <20190228161213.D1442200F6FF92@ary.local> <01fd8d9e-fe47-453a-b4e0-f0a9d68ce43b@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <20190228211123.08E97200F73515@ary.local> <y1shk7tgwkXXGKyb6JpQGl3wBrXJSY0lcI9p8S10+Ws=.sha-256@antelope.email> <20190301001549.034DA200F759FD@ary.local> <AKMk6mFEu9kvnOxeceBB+vNAqqDJDq2Ha2enPbOCdtQ=.sha-256@antelope.email>
Comments: In-reply-to Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> message dated "Fri, 01 Mar 2019 08:30:34 +0100."
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <85821.1551480535.1@orthanc.ca>
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 14:48:55 -0800
Message-Id: <42ad5ccd33370657@orthanc.ca>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/FttB69qQ47oT7vfJ0XsFRMB1tB0>
Subject: Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ?
X-BeenThere: extra@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Email mailstore and eXtensions To Revise or Amend <extra.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/extra/>
List-Post: <mailto:extra@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/extra>, <mailto:extra-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2019 22:49:00 -0000

Arnt Gulbrandsen writes:
> So why not let the sender supply the logo by marking a body part, and 
> then specifying when and whether to use it? Why must the logo be 
> marked/inserted/supplied after the DKIM signature?

How is this not just X-Logo, ala X-Face?  Neither are
trustworthy in any sense, so why bother pretending?

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email