Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ?
Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Wed, 27 February 2019 14:35 UTC
Return-Path: <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
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 B9E25130FDC for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:35:45 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.979
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.979 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gulbrandsen.priv.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 fEINWy8UqtFK for <extra@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:35:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1E312130FCF for <extra@ietf.org>; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 06:35:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A80AC05E2; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:37:33 +0000 (GMT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gulbrandsen.priv.no; s=mail; t=1551278253; bh=dYuD6TvRI02w0qknpKMDUsVxkrTW0FBWOqNopqLAiJ0=; h=From:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=JzqL7N3ke+nb0XxapW26xqIuVHojixOhVmWUEUEWE9QQdcHGbWRhmdD2sGnq7/vbJ zWRecEWho90dLwnNdMvsYRWNHWFE9JcAkX/5spQ43MoGx9dW27CU6UB+b4cUPnHxN7 uaKudiE/t5os165zJnyGyKNdcPRhxQg20wVikuBw=
Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.2.0) with esmtpsa id 1551278252-26265-2661/9/35; Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:37:32 +0000
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
Cc: extra@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 15:35:40 +0100
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <f7521583-848a-4ee8-9cc9-512f4628bd18@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
In-Reply-To: <492e1fd1-d663-05b9-e2e5-993059bcc3f5@isode.com>
References: <alpine.OSX.2.21.1902262150050.14048@ary.local> <a9a292dc-0503-42f5-bbe6-42f76705af66@gulbrandsen.priv.no> <492e1fd1-d663-05b9-e2e5-993059bcc3f5@isode.com>
User-Agent: Trojita/0.7; Qt/5.7.1; xcb; Linux; Devuan GNU/Linux 2.0 (ascii)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/extra/Q0nM3iwf7kA2fVZ_VPIORIGxsGw>
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: Wed, 27 Feb 2019 14:35:46 -0000
Maybe I misunderstood. I thought that BIMI said: If a message is delivered by the system and meets some other conditions, then it gets a reserved flag, which the user is unable to set (or clear). And my response to that is that people expect to be able to copy their mail from one server to another. When messages are migrated then they lose the magic BIMI flag, because the new server sees them being inserted by the user using IMAP APPEND. This sounds to me as if it rather diminishes the point of BIMI... That some servers don't support flags is okay. The servers that can't be extended don't get a lot of new extensions anyway. (BTW, John, you reject my mail as spam. Even though I've been practically a hermit for a year now. I made this list-only on a whim.) Arnt
- [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John R. Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Bron Gondwana
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Bron Gondwana
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Michael Peddemors
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Ned Freed
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Ned Freed
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John R. Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Bron Gondwana
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Lyndon Nerenberg
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Ned Freed
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Ned Freed
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? John R Levine
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Ned Freed
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Robert Mueller
- Re: [Extra] Is this a plausible IMAP extension ? Brandon Long