IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Tue, 07 February 2017 14:21 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.net>
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 C993B129C64; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 06:21:11 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=dcrocker.net
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 S81QAEutkQRy; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 06:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from simon.songbird.com (simon.songbird.com [72.52.113.5]) (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 C4E72129C62; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 06:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.168] (76-218-8-128.lightspeed.sntcca.sbcglobal.net [76.218.8.128]) (authenticated bits=0) by simon.songbird.com (8.14.4/8.14.4/Debian-4.1ubuntu1) with ESMTP id v17EMmEM004300 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Tue, 7 Feb 2017 06:22:48 -0800
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple/simple; d=dcrocker.net; s=default; t=1486477368; bh=KxWKYDKe37ta0S9CO9qjMz63xjjlUfEX5Rl2ZpdE41o=; h=Subject:To:References:Cc:Reply-To:From:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=juaw9FbJfF9Pg8Oijqy3XVFoRnWR8BUj6jo/G7BMO0TcORXMqGb+ZyphX0TZ94Jx5 J0+H++CAXHspYISvHMQUwovSzjaxvTcNMPI4tXy1pFDi3e2V0f8W+XhON6uTZCA+BA X2tAGqN8ES/COwAc2RF0Ga4AH45blhlWLQgnukC0=
Subject: Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) - reducing configuration complexity
To: Gren Elliot <fatkudu@gmail.com>
References: <148616796247.4079.7104562493351135409.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <11e900d0-553e-0635-06f4-8510bd80ecfd@dcrocker.net> <4ff42a3b-1f8e-3e25-14e7-b1d3ed2f69c2@isode.com> <368f2b68-8f10-9517-1edb-d213ff10563b@dcrocker.net> <1486435969.2314063.872594064.21072F60@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAMQk0F-Xgkd7D8k1KmzpGdUKV7q8FERCrSh_weJ6MaioAE=dbQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
Message-ID: <c2e15625-2241-603e-080d-8593b87e0bca@dcrocker.net>
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 06:21:00 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAMQk0F-Xgkd7D8k1KmzpGdUKV7q8FERCrSh_weJ6MaioAE=dbQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/cNhAiRDGYZizEHPcByqJEmn_1uI>
Cc: jmap@ietf.org, iesg <iesg@ietf.org>, ietf@ietf.org
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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 14:21:12 -0000

On 2/7/2017 3:26 AM, Gren Elliot wrote:
> Just to add my voice to the call for easier configuration where we don’t
> force users to configure countless different things.  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)
...
> It would be nice to see config dialogs where user’s are asked for
> minimal information (user name, perhaps server name) and then the device
> discovers what is available there (Mail/Contacts/Calendar/…) and offers
> the user a way to select them and


This issue is for user interface design, not underlying protocol design. 
  Hence while it is extremely important in terms of usability, it is 
outside the scope of the IETF.

Having these functions embedded into a single protocol implicitly 
requires that these different functions share the same configuration 
data.  While such sharing might be common practice, requiring the 
sharing limits operational choices.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email