Fwd: Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) - reducing configuration complexity

Gren Elliot <fatkudu@gmail.com> Tue, 07 February 2017 15:38 UTC

Return-Path: <fatkudu@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EDF7B129CB8; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:38:30 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com
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 g8vsx-urIq7w; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:38:28 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-yb0-x230.google.com (mail-yb0-x230.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c09::230]) (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 D77D3129C9E; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:38:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-yb0-x230.google.com with SMTP id w194so36351286ybe.0; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:38:27 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=fflSiA+DXbFbHui+PXMXK6LyijM3DYbrUxU3sK0wBAE=; b=D9fBZWKonB2BBodVR9bay0dD9Ly0Hcw6rTZ+2aPwACVJLjrdjDx1QD4B6GG7PXIxg7 M7lRHf8LUYcH1Ejd4KRYE3qM9rrO4JPjF7ONmpXDz4C5Kumu1QQgeTNG1z8wGMfKQvl0 6obvRAGj9xsKzaRG89PUX7XcxR5EWfh7fTwqAduv4mpkmRfhC0RO5HhT8xAehu3HtnxN Z5vd0f85VKTk3DryD84OqLQqAjNr5JcBul6fObPWKCRdHwNJKQaFPSGdIrPBMpC6dMBW PjoIccV6xqH3SjDxPfF0OzXmHaZnClTuQc5P0xats/PkNWWJoGJKHtau6rj6Z/iSv/ey NoHw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=fflSiA+DXbFbHui+PXMXK6LyijM3DYbrUxU3sK0wBAE=; b=W/X1NIUIcKA0vObAVt+Um08WzoDPD0DLhoxkPFCTj2DYsNt1F/qo8YyGY2zmih/0gM uBXL7aEHUL9XjDMMT7VbhAMOrvhtO5r1vr9hPUEQ16LLa8VwXvto6bTz5lNQ72T+0Tiu fkNhPwbgWieYH0Av0DsRfX9O/soFiuruyDKRtDgZmZMl6rerdC1ikQy2dyfERH2S1eQz 7uKF8RvEvuENGZgocLerbYurZ+ksdlEu4NbHGrz/IeDmBDK3QAGp0f6+q0tx3ehw21N6 4I2+2McviI29IJ5cAbevfd8uPK15ysN//3yNfTdFPEHvXRB8vvvRkHeEdxtxO3wSWlEy 1Ysw==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39lOtDQrhj8aSZ13/iOnRQsHePxdUmDzu7aeSl/VEF6lQ5pKpr0AsYyzMNYOBLyscy7XmCgkxJbju88BHg==
X-Received: by 10.37.51.215 with SMTP id z206mr11618321ybz.88.1486481906881; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:38:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from 1058052472880 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:38:26 -0800
From: Gren Elliot <fatkudu@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Airmail (397)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:38:26 -0800
Message-ID: <CAMQk0F-6CFLHKvTxSaPV20Lp-hVOSSk_WrHOGq6-LOUO8aDNww@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Fwd: Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) - reducing configuration complexity
To: jmap@ietf.org, iesg@ietf.org, ietf@ietf.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a1148a1180670d50547f28a95"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/PLHpmmd74LWn5EZzZ6KdMMtPjcg>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 15:38:31 -0000

> Trying to setup a new device for use with open protocols is a complete
> nightmare - you end up needing to configure 2 things for mail (IMAP
> and SMTP)

and now, because we will have to be backward compatible, it will be
three. so that third had best be a really massive win. and i am not
seeing it. what i am seeing is second system syndrome in a wrapper of
whatever today <http://airmail.calendar/2017-02-07%2012:00:00%20GMT>'s
wrapping fashion is.

randy

Why?  You will either be using IMAP/SMTP to access your mail/submit your
messages or you will be using JMAP.  If you have the option of the latter,
you’ve just halved the number of things that need configuring.

Regards,
Gren Elliot
(forgot to include the mailing lists in reply to Randy earlier)