Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions
Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com> Mon, 03 July 2017 12:46 UTC
Return-Path: <mellon@fugue.com>
X-Original-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCB161315D7 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 05:46:42 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 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_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham 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 U0-dDvJUaYBo for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 05:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
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 3C3BC129B19 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 3 Jul 2017 05:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-qt0-x231.google.com with SMTP id 32so142184542qtv.1 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Mon, 03 Jul 2017 05:46:41 -0700 (PDT)
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=GYfSWEgPae91sIdwmkrI4dqfBpKCbPeLW/HJNxKzJAQ=; b=x56iUvgiBGGyQuz41e9MXVYvdEiVHRaY+xNBV36aDinHSbLCgZ5nm4IyfR3QIoz3Ur xqQOs2GstWJ3WOThlk9BvTQiAzOmOGRKHcpUsC91esYIZFdoUp+HeHPvtteN3aZKy3cB RxrkDIFBLrQq/lfl/hwUQa0X0Yq7SZXYnAE1RIDwcMIZ13bfLg5HWcKQJ2hSh2XFCBEs p3ikacye5X3rsaPbquiLrMHjGhRl0C5b7aZNNIVLSRsGrZ00YAWAsQDO+OiLQFCPWasf YEplrmANQ1o+FyE+UbsDSwfFVT2rZudnya9r1MTICxwMTkU62XrToE5Yo+PzGbfYfIs1 norQ==
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=GYfSWEgPae91sIdwmkrI4dqfBpKCbPeLW/HJNxKzJAQ=; b=Udk38czwb5MHxszCrSCWMruPpIgl22AjXs87Be3kkRamLD1IxwaD+335eh99wvLwjV 8VpSoMWmHoThqH5Gb3GYwEx6xVjgzNpHCl67aQFFYc5azbsSKppzZhj3m0YGwXhWlafi zAC+6G60AYUPOzR1eRkAQkPz+ArgCJcPAjqeYMrLZgoitc2+mZK52CcyR6HZxXxfpoet wtjLW09LaR3g6GI1XkaWvySELq9wjuBprpszyCUbxfcOskD8ffnZfG3oQNfQBi7HZotf H4X9MKTpgUJav8uUdwvcmkF8EXL0jCjoSD0e6bKGBk/CgBa/SlOGgIQgQwXegK2hc0va 8sbA==
X-Gm-Message-State: AIVw111HWYwH3HVXaknVK31iaJUzjT4OtnuLI9rHynQjPpyOjp0cZvRb 10XcgqD3axyPGW+B
X-Received: by 10.200.43.58 with SMTP id 55mr11982312qtu.202.1499086000370; Mon, 03 Jul 2017 05:46:40 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [10.0.30.153] (c-73-167-64-188.hsd1.nh.comcast.net. [73.167.64.188]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v34sm12493289qtg.31.2017.07.03.05.46.39 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 03 Jul 2017 05:46:39 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ted Lemon <mellon@fugue.com>
Message-Id: <D395EA28-4A25-4B25-8476-20E1B1DA6C01@fugue.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_1D96746A-AD61-4429-B2A0-72E06A4E9921"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 10.3 \(3273\))
Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 08:46:37 -0400
In-Reply-To: <5bb947f1-738d-0dc1-781d-5e22750b94f7@dovecot.fi>
Cc: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>, jmap@ietf.org
To: Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi@dovecot.fi>
References: <1498017178.1304756.1016181400.0FCF0683@webmail.messagingengine.com> <ac4d7763-40cd-ff49-c787-c11074fbcdc5@dovecot.fi> <04327CC4-3EB0-4C06-8CDF-774575D2C4C8@isode.com> <5bb947f1-738d-0dc1-781d-5e22750b94f7@dovecot.fi>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3273)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/-xDLaS1ItMUNtJ-7_0FSYyBjDg4>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions
X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jmap/>
List-Post: <mailto:jmap@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap>, <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 03 Jul 2017 12:46:43 -0000
On Jul 3, 2017, at 5:35 AM, Aki Tuomi <aki.tuomi@dovecot.fi> wrote: > I am not sure if the problem with HTTP+JSON is so horrible with > performance that it requires bulking the requests, and to me it feels > bit like premature optimization. It sounds from what you are saying as though swagger compatibility would preclude this optimization.
- [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions Neil Jenkins
- Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions Aki Tuomi
- Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions Aki Tuomi
- Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions Ted Lemon
- Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions Aki Tuomi
- Re: [Jmap] JMAP Conceptual Decisions Neil Jenkins