[JMAP] Re: Blobext: should it obsolete blob?
Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com> Sun, 26 April 2026 00:31 UTC
Return-Path: <brong@fastmailteam.com>
X-Original-To: jmap@mail2.ietf.org
Delivered-To: jmap@mail2.ietf.org
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BE150E32A5C4 for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2026 17:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1777163473; bh=EoOC6ojc7rJbagM90cJ/Il+6V3KjqYtIQ23CWRJKgpU=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=MYuLDkMctYMOR9ICelwvGH5wJClu+33eeuNxxtFEpsS+bPNKYVBkNbb1sa2CCA3Rc +rC0T7OR1aQ53/eNHLkxLCzvH40rcgQKiJv7LdqQ9A/6ac1F4ehc3rxZvDQHsTKqAD 4pSY9xMJoD4DU7CFGC+LJWYv8hKB6XR3nJfhuQb8=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.798
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.798 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmailteam.com header.b="U6GY7wmv"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b="ZlVF6TRn"
Received: from mail2.ietf.org ([166.84.6.31]) by localhost (mail2.ietf.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lM7CmOoH6VAr for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2026 17:31:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fhigh-a4-smtp.messagingengine.com (fhigh-a4-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.155]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature ECDSA (P-256) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail2.ietf.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CDCB8E32A4EA for <jmap@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2026 17:30:26 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phl-compute-10.internal (phl-compute-10.internal [10.202.2.50]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7084714000B8 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Sat, 25 Apr 2026 20:30:20 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from phl-imap-15 ([10.202.2.104]) by phl-compute-10.internal (MEProxy); Sat, 25 Apr 2026 20:30:20 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= fastmailteam.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from :from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm3; t=1777163420; x= 1777249820; bh=VXveB3M8SI1HokZ/HLWBNLkzpE4StJalIUVluxQMWv0=; b=U 6GY7wmv2KAym4c3oBaeBIttl6Bb0MZdvg2Vs3nF95httQ+dvsH92jrtNCNJLyTMq dzIQUer2+Bb7pgZ2iAV1sl6reGGfaeN7qiLdXAE2uVHdTfDiRwY9foi+jLRN/8hc lHyp33q/Fq/zBIxdeaFPBR+JZMEwvb0u/eWedJoQzFvaZQl2I0SiZdKFscU4FaiC c0ooYC0Qs5/DoWHSvQQbU02Hb4Lm7JZEahKSJWukhNR8suzBfOPfCBN7BAS/VXPh DfxTLxJKbw/lW2k7+CEzD+c3guhRBEfxKml9Mhi3A4jw3W7PPsSIQjskvUJHesAs vfAY9PwVXbioiRDejgSXg==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm2; t= 1777163420; x=1777249820; bh=VXveB3M8SI1HokZ/HLWBNLkzpE4StJalIUV luxQMWv0=; b=ZlVF6TRnkJY6QcF89kxHgYNzlmOS2R8WCBOinGa9Qk9Of8RB6gA Cx99C0MYmA5JLDKFHg75tLl40qFFShXkBu/g/k0N1FPiBxb769atx+oKdpErB8TR FEV2g7VVbstqT8/nfzAsPyOdH3EjTXjq1fZr0WfOZnGs0ITqK9KFn6yM+QsvWL4w djBWAsCH/7x2u8THkJJ9oyMBheGbpux3DBZF/TUwEyd9L9xw1GW6uMv1Ykohcc4o lYNfX3X6wQElR2ZRAMhWMMzKSW7Sn9A8ss82/cy/w9DzFwiWXTE+uNhtpgl37/XB HogKxAQVMWDWuulvzxJ2HEGCPKcyMWmlzmw==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:nFztaXHmD587pk53g1BSlRJD044WroFZR3likNoc8rRcZb_Hyaga5w> <xme:nFztafJ3iUwIBpYIDGJw3RnmnqqpbafKw4DavrV-A34opgmwZwMwoWKz1tLg8XMoz Bv6H-n3XEJlgzb6C1awoUA_VSLawSgZCwRJ-kuQp6vaQzk>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefhedrtddtgdejgeefhecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecunecujfgurhepofggfffhvffkjghfufgtsegrtderreertd dtnecuhfhrohhmpedfuehrohhnucfiohhnugifrghnrgdfuceosghrohhnghesfhgrshht mhgrihhlthgvrghmrdgtohhmqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeefveejveekudekffffve evueetfeehuedufefftefggefhheelteelgeeghefftdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigv pedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpegsrhhonhhgsehfrghsthhmrghilhhtvg grmhdrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepuddpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghp thhtohepjhhmrghpsehivghtfhdrohhrgh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:nFztaaqu38qWHdzHy9U3CjKvnQcxIy4SX6A-Of71y9YLEphDrz_Qmw> <xmx:nFztafkugm8YvP0ERup5YzhihbS7TOR6eMxXnektu38dTfWnH_ZW4w> <xmx:nFztaU0hUCiUaUGqt9q9AocN1c4iL94yy7ZTi1TrQLX2JbQ89aOn_Q> <xmx:nFztafDcegmwbYm2tK89uQx-12q6SzgRUIi0-901rqd5i3gcSqlgaA> <xmx:nFztaYDUqHbiED_8S0l1yEnmOOISBSRGPBncP0m0WmkumO3kzNDddb1V>
Feedback-ID: i2d7042ce:Fastmail
Received: by mailuser.phl.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id 40D95780070; Sat, 25 Apr 2026 20:30:20 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2026 10:29:59 +1000
From: Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmailteam.com>
To: jmap@ietf.org
Message-Id: <899feb67-6ff0-438a-a8c0-e76817581c42@app.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <FB58950D-7427-478C-B2E8-EFE3B7F2E51F@stalw.art>
References: <285f7f35-05ee-4f10-bfbd-2028fcc5bbb1@app.fastmail.com> <8a2a68e9-89cb-4dcf-a6b1-ffb7717e1515@dogfoodapp.fastmail.com> <FB58950D-7427-478C-B2E8-EFE3B7F2E51F@stalw.art>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="263eacd11f679911c8be163599a09a71f51a2f2f"
Message-ID-Hash: RFYDAYAUWOWIVWKAEEG7SAXSZY75GNBW
X-Message-ID-Hash: RFYDAYAUWOWIVWKAEEG7SAXSZY75GNBW
X-MailFrom: brong@fastmailteam.com
X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; emergency; loop; banned-address; member-moderation; header-match-jmap.ietf.org-0; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header
X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.9rc6
Precedence: list
Subject: [JMAP] Re: Blobext: should it obsolete blob?
List-Id: JSON Meta Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/7DCdHq8oJhDG2aZV8FdI7atRdCk>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/jmap>
List-Help: <mailto:jmap-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Owner: <mailto:jmap-owner@ietf.org>
List-Post: <mailto:jmap@ietf.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:jmap-join@ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:jmap-leave@ietf.org>
Thanks both! I'll go ahead and implement the :blob2 capability at Fastmail and test against that with my filenode client work. On Sat, Apr 25, 2026, at 18:27, Mauro De Gennaro wrote: > Hi Bron, > > I also agree with the proposed changes. > > > Best, > Mauro > > >> On 23 Apr 2026, at 07:21, Neil Jenkins <neilj=40fastmailteam.com@dmarc.ietf.org> wrote: >> >> On Tue, 14 Apr 2026, at 09:06, Bron Gondwana wrote: >>> • Make this document OBSOLETE the existing RFC9404, so move all the text from there into here. >>> • Change Blob/upload to be Blob/set - since it now has update and destroy as well. >> >> Yeah, I think both of these are reasonable. >> >> Cheers, >> Neil. >> _______________________________________________ >> JMAP mailing list -- jmap@ietf.org >> To unsubscribe send an email to jmap-leave@ietf.org > _______________________________________________ > JMAP mailing list -- jmap@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to jmap-leave@ietf.org > -- Bron Gondwana, CEO, Fastmail Pty Ltd / Fastmail US LLC brong@fastmailteam.com
- [JMAP] Blobext: should it obsolete blob? Bron Gondwana
- [JMAP] Re: Blobext: should it obsolete blob? Neil Jenkins
- [JMAP] Re: Blobext: should it obsolete blob? Mauro De Gennaro
- [JMAP] Re: Blobext: should it obsolete blob? Bron Gondwana