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

Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Tue, 07 February 2017 15:18 UTC

Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.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 A3111129CB2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:18:53 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.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 kg7uWcJFRZC9 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:18:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail-qt0-x231.google.com (mail-qt0-x231.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c0d::231]) (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 A952D129CB3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 7 Feb 2017 07:18:51 -0800 (PST)
Received: by mail-qt0-x231.google.com with SMTP id x49so137062300qtc.2 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:18:51 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fugue-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=upxyFFSs8w1zOzixauNrrHtqMwX1OVNYfhUVmXMqd3c=; b=nrTlhYFQLwe5hkiiJr+jFM3eToS5rHA1syXt30/n5oHpch59aAJ+66o62QIYdqG1BI eNkHCfY4oeLr3LzbpKM/pL/XWe/OyY+vbYN4Hrjeu7MtoESmNLL1cH06KDiW6RlFokYA edTt8yMJCPw9nqnsXYvbFX/2idbNH5G/sTER+EgkQQW71n10/ZM+hEQ1FDwgsaDDoInQ JsKqv5qfs8vi5Sak9HQaIWsZgxESMC8sA95NYQCEcSzq7aqapkOCf7+sAWlIChr7UlPz +x9YHX9kymW3OESKP4O3tZIPo3EkFtTMWYQU900EUXbqr2SEFOHHPFiNGKqrGiU5KW1s 9rMA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=upxyFFSs8w1zOzixauNrrHtqMwX1OVNYfhUVmXMqd3c=; b=iic3AB+UiiBP13oPzdvDx4AMYl37yw9LsdnxYyo4BZpOvGoDaw021vYfsXe5PzjL4W nSXORy4XvG+oajyqoLhFl11+tx+HFX3/GiyLv4iCijzP/Szjc+ICGgr2gVX5nXSMutXk 36b59dr00x89VTGnbP/Dcq7M9oN7ZKXkPQwmweRQO8K42ht2dQWpaAZtOkrN1b2QxmXL Yjhs/XXoVOEpU2uK7o6mXrN+sx0S38PlakK8WjZUndvtqCGOE0whCEGqt+W7trFH47Km 4lbBI5oE1gtfH2LSee8K+mq+PiFhfMa1bqnLX735cBU088wszGVfkaTQP9VClB3mnWIj pfJA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39nn15GN6n8DbCoyZeUzhoh64bdMIHE4sHHoflMM+gVaBG3zne8vbnxRCC5wxofKmQ==
X-Received: by 10.200.47.129 with SMTP id l1mr14308854qta.148.1486480730382; Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:18:50 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.0.20.228] (c-73-167-64-188.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [73.167.64.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id k8sm3590624qke.29.2017.02.07.07.18.48 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 07 Feb 2017 07:18:48 -0800 (PST)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <8B24068E-6EA6-404B-AFEC-76C9A0029954@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6FB82B1A-B4F8-4B93-B738-2880351BC4F6"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.2 \(3259\))
Subject: Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) - reducing configuration complexity
Date: Tue, 07 Feb 2017 10:18:45 -0500
In-Reply-To: <c2e15625-2241-603e-080d-8593b87e0bca@dcrocker.net>
To: Dave Crocker <dcrocker@bbiw.net>
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> <c2e15625-2241-603e-080d-8593b87e0bca@dcrocker.net>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3259)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/fBU-eDN-O3kig6cfblROhc-ngiQ>
Cc: jmap@ietf.org, iesg <iesg@ietf.org>, Gren Elliot <fatkudu@gmail.com>, ietf@ietf.org
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 15:18:53 -0000

On Feb 7, 2017, at 9:21 AM, Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> wrote:
>> 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.

I must beg to differ.   While it's true that we don't care explicitly about UI, we certainly care about enabling UIs that work.   Providing a query that returns the information required to send mail is definitely worth doing.   Of course, that could be just allowing a message to be uploaded, and having a command that says "deliver this message".   It's not clear to me that submission by way of SMTP is actually a win here—it's really an extra step, since you probably were going to save the draft using the mailbox protocol anyway.