Re: [imap5] Feature set? - was Re: Designing a new replacement protocol for IMAP

Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm> Mon, 20 February 2012 13:13 UTC

Return-Path: <brong@fastmail.fm>
X-Original-To: imap5@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: imap5@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C03A621F8596 for <imap5@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 05:13:57 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.466
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.466 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.133, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id funL3eYXu-Wt for <imap5@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 05:13:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com (out5-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.29]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8A5E921F8472 for <imap5@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 05:13:52 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute6.internal (compute6.nyi.mail.srv.osa [10.202.2.46]) by gateway1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B00720780 for <imap5@ietf.org>; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 08:13:52 -0500 (EST)
Received: from web1.nyi.mail.srv.osa ([10.202.2.211]) by compute6.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 20 Feb 2012 08:13:52 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= message-id:from:to:cc:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding :content-type:references:subject:in-reply-to:date; s=mesmtp; bh= SNJQ0Co3BMI5uiUz0zWdyYIKDbc=; b=JUcmU/xfu2eA/CG3wg0Ex+vz3JTqFc4v Z719kGCxKtFgrzHdETyU4p1s6XggoX3LPkDC9h/Pj8Xj4Z4asmNDNgcuSl2eDCwc YzPPm1YyiMTHJcXS8LppTPv/gAYJcaRrTqbiHidSJaQ5CnhIoJ4CnHLYuE9lCLg2 Lgp896QZ/bI=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=message-id:from:to:cc:mime-version :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:references:subject :in-reply-to:date; s=smtpout; bh=SNJQ0Co3BMI5uiUz0zWdyYIKDbc=; b= fxP/9QWy3xGVIXMTp7xMTZfn7qAzde1nQv9mVix2u0t8YAX5hvu9cBN7zmr8zq+8 9j/AJ1XBWjeDaYB+iAyuM19t9J1PCiWWUNRzT9R8rOcN8puA7JlL6G7H8cA/VH9T +bSZ2yuID6lW/XeKOh3w3DQ6QOY+XOf6DzlcXI6/hSc=
Received: by web1.nyi.mail.srv.osa (Postfix, from userid 99) id E0382A000DB; Mon, 20 Feb 2012 08:13:51 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <1329743631.12698.140661038857849@webmail.messagingengine.com>
X-Sasl-Enc: dj2C6eZDzYDItpaP1sSCaqVqdcJcu9iUH+00/yDh5gxn 1329743631
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm>
To: Filip Navara <filip.navara@gmail.com>, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
References: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1202161626400.30682@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk><4F3D6E57.8010301@qbik.com><alpine.LSU.2.00.1202171127330.30682@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk><4F3F4F8F.3040601@qbik.com><1329550573.30138.140661038121885@webmail.messagingengine.com><alpine.LSU.2.00.1202191832430.12769@hermes-2.csi.cam.ac.uk><20120219192604.GA11323@launde.brong.net><4F415C07.3040100@qbik.com><20120219220835.GB12549@launde.brong.net><4F417EF5.6030809@qbik.com><20120219233901.GA13600@launde.brong.net><4F41952B.8020809@qbik.com><1329738117.22774.140661038826265@webmail.messagingengine.com><4F423CE4.5060103@qbik.com> <CAD8HnzwaaHjPTwsze0ACOTgPdEUgyrJZ62CDyasxE0eKd8rDcA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAD8HnzwaaHjPTwsze0ACOTgPdEUgyrJZ62CDyasxE0eKd8rDcA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 14:13:51 +0100
Cc: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>, "Discussion on drastically slimming-down IMAP." <imap5@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [imap5] Feature set? - was Re: Designing a new replacement protocol for IMAP
X-BeenThere: imap5@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion on drastically slimming-down IMAP." <imap5.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/imap5>, <mailto:imap5-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/imap5>
List-Post: <mailto:imap5@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:imap5-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5>, <mailto:imap5-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 20 Feb 2012 13:13:57 -0000

On Mon, Feb 20, 2012, at 01:43 PM, Filip Navara wrote:
> JYFI, we (eM Client, www.emclient.com) do use BURL in some cases.
> 
> F.

How do you handle BCC?

> On Mon, Feb 20, 2012 at 1:30 PM, Adrien de Croy <adrien@qbik.com> wrote:
> 
> >
> > We didn't implement BURL (HURL).
> >
> > It was just too far over the insanity horizon to write an IMAP client for
> > that purpose.
> >
> > Especially since I don't know of a single client that uses it.
> >
> > So the MUA takes care of BCC in sent items, when it uploads the file there
> > after sending with SMTP.

So in other words, requiring the IMAP5 server to strip BCC when sending to
the MTA would cause no more IO or CPU usage than what is currently required
to do two separate uploads, one via SMTP and one to the Sent folder.

Which has been my point all along.  This is making the server do what the
client would be doing anyway - doing it in one place rather than many -
purely for the case of a user-facing IMAP client.

Bron.
-- 
  Bron Gondwana
  brong@fastmail.fm