IETF Logo Mail Archive

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

Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com> Wed, 08 February 2017 13:52 UTC

Return-Path: <alexey.melnikov@isode.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 5D180129A98 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:52:31 -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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=isode.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 xwKLzA9w4FFc for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:52:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from waldorf.isode.com (waldorf.isode.com [62.232.206.188]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9A988129AA3 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:52:18 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1486561937; d=isode.com; s=june2016; i=@isode.com; bh=yqgb8NdI0TG+dAAZp2mBI4cuUSozVza/N9g0r6c5AxY=; h=From:Sender:Reply-To:Subject:Date:Message-ID:To:Cc:MIME-Version: In-Reply-To:References:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description; b=MrWXiTTr8QXRkBqW79V83+JEVQtT6BYhfa/HxVFB/QjwmrJHdh4NlS7koJ/HUm50rjBhRg 71eDI9nZR5HSSKEQwnAlgNl1nW8l82Obptig9wTtrf3G5ba1R6THBRMurzcaFUX7Z897+j qMgsUHEWlOzcIhqRrvMeKPhnXmPSVX0=;
Received: from [172.20.1.215] (dhcp-215.isode.net [172.20.1.215]) by waldorf.isode.com (submission channel) via TCP with ESMTPSA id <WJsikQA6w2cd@waldorf.isode.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:52:17 +0000
Subject: Fwd: Re: [Jmap] Fwd: Re: WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) - reducing configuration complexity
References: <3b955910-12d0-2c56-0dc2-30279f98aea5@isode.com>
To: "ietf@ietf.org" <ietf@ietf.org>
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <3b955910-12d0-2c56-0dc2-30279f98aea5@isode.com>
Message-ID: <19fabdd7-77c5-fc13-616e-26d39d2f23df@isode.com>
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 13:52:00 +0000
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.0
In-Reply-To: <3b955910-12d0-2c56-0dc2-30279f98aea5@isode.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------3E365E928797EF858A491BE5"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/vGLq-A-WEQaSjQO6AclGpGs8zF4>
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: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 13:52:31 -0000

Forwarding here, because Arnt only replied to the JMAP mailing list and 
my reply to him went to the same place.


-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: 	Re: [Jmap] Fwd: Re: WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol 
(jmap) - reducing configuration complexity
Date: 	Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:48:54 +0000
From: 	Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
To: 	Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>, jmap@ietf.org



On 08/02/2017 12:56, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:

> Randy Bush writes:
>> yet another protocol that requires a flag day.  that has worked out
>> so well for ipv6.
>
> JMAP does not, AFAICT, require a flag day, any more than IMAP required
> a flag day over POP. If Fastmail's deployment of JMAP-in-spe was
> noticed by its customers, the noise certainly hasn't been loud enough
> that I've heard about it.

Agreed. JMAP and IMAP are likely to co-exist for long time.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email