[JMAP] Re: Blobext: should it obsolete blob?
Neil Jenkins <neilj@fastmailteam.com> Thu, 23 April 2026 05:22 UTC
Return-Path: <neilj@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 2E016E16AC71 for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Apr 2026 22:22:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1776921735; bh=20LJLUTMFxkuoPeC4B8yyCM9t9lKbMcW+fkrePFmHxQ=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=oWl/6wTOBGOjz3MThtSPa2QCyslaBpSKLkJnugyWbl4Rty5xqRtQib1gpwbBFTrH7 sEiygduCv/P3ryMpz/WAknQ5FhBZ5ehhZ03c9Lr0QwavJ6+X1uhY+82nsrlteT8pHT 3CeZUOUzT4VMbGLmOJiptfEui+YsDayl8nrnN0zg=
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="XG8aD5Kf"; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b="IgdULpUp"
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 eMC5cT5lCV4p for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Apr 2026 22:22:14 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from fout-a4-smtp.messagingengine.com (fout-a4-smtp.messagingengine.com [103.168.172.147]) (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 743A2E16AB9B for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 22 Apr 2026 22:21:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from phl-compute-10.internal (phl-compute-10.internal [10.202.2.50]) by mailfout.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 27772EC0455 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 01:21:40 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from phl-imap-15 ([10.202.2.104]) by phl-compute-10.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 23 Apr 2026 01:21:40 -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=1776921700; x= 1777008100; bh=nm5h8cCkIY1PtPHfrmMPKIfC4KIuohOp21luSUruUsw=; b=X G8aD5KfKLDqsj9MEkba5jQKqXt/2vpzb36wWXMkxXocURdMYYiscA7IChqc304lA AV+gLpspw7RPil704q6kw4Hz5VuIsZhvrThGcPyAO0YOpuDfMR+v6Hh+9UpdP4uW t5NS7ghBjrnYNfkKH5Xr7qYH/VmoCOTGYHF5rcxuL3+CrAW4WbVoF6ttfSg2TaO2 PActGWznUNiMIG4RE50YKZY7SEIj4rcDe7Ta8cJBhJVJN+iqRKf+L3vafCTs/kkR 7U6sYCtP49lVSVkw3bXvyiFKST4wK50T0gWM0n4YJFoRre5PYwP/JficKvLqYcFg ZO1cSU+lG+SAuMmTdBgdg==
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= 1776921700; x=1777008100; bh=nm5h8cCkIY1PtPHfrmMPKIfC4KIuohOp21l uSUruUsw=; b=IgdULpUpjMHOOr17xzPwl6agoUNvc9UM1JVNADRpU3it7GtwX/N AMsA8MPWJUeDn9IKCaOiFZK8geIvfSgt+lweuDGs/Ymt2tXOIUuhIjJsiQDNWvhd VWCAfLFMgWw+Lswkh3trpmhq7sEKevMQUSwDIEFlAqrK4923BCr43oXUMHHZRAuB 1LZBKozynFBGgMArkUFreIx9xA7ZzCgOGIYDTwuVucBjpZcgBAkWaznCNxkylanj thiW0ca4D/7eUdLAjo976QHPBzUeRxUXsQ1Wy0XE2u9D7bXXAN3DMgtYQJ/SgpLk usp0k9RFtrIOjFMMKRNM5PvGW3yJbqf358g==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:ZKzpaQEor28hhu60EgnzjnH0Pf9-MQ31wsXmV-VUXrldSN2Ok_aVuQ> <xme:ZKzpaULC_4UVTWHQgTVG8oHFdMpm2eRQYxCTcUcZydRr-Hu4zlLf_6f-BpBHNAubx BgWx3N_DZfFyZiL9_qYID-CHxBTEi8Ozp1loCqhVx439bktiA>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeefhedrtddtgdeiiedvlecutefuodetggdotefrod ftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecuuegr ihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjug hrpefoggffhffvkfgjfhfutgesrgdtreerredttdenucfhrhhomhepfdfpvghilhculfgv nhhkihhnshdfuceonhgvihhljhesfhgrshhtmhgrihhlthgvrghmrdgtohhmqeenucggtf frrghtthgvrhhnpedvteeivdevgfeileevgeeggeeguefgvdduvdduhedtvdekhfetfedu teffudetudenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhroh hmpehnvghilhhjsehfrghsthhmrghilhhtvggrmhdrtghomhdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohep uddpmhhouggvpehsmhhtphhouhhtpdhrtghpthhtohepjhhmrghpsehivghtfhdrohhrgh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:ZKzpaTqS74JD1cpuKRyeXK_WUUPicHdp3LpqKOHd7RkTAvUzUC2DAw> <xmx:ZKzpaUlzeb3RW-SkMn3XWHD7TB_46AHlVXB_Zzg-UvZnKnl_Bso0Yw> <xmx:ZKzpaV0XuNsa4DRKwdjLdyifexTjWi3roCmJumODN_IqI_rLW-NwxA> <xmx:ZKzpacABkYq5ywY4hyNZs2qRjVblOTeDCpWanAHGjqC86VSSKNZO-g> <xmx:ZKzpaZDt-5g5yrWnHPUum9N1emanx55bS878YZLpEGM-9TI9fL_ppKLl>
Feedback-ID: ibc614277:Fastmail
Received: by mailuser.phl.internal (Postfix, from userid 501) id F31CE780070; Thu, 23 Apr 2026 01:21:39 -0400 (EDT)
X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface
MIME-Version: 1.0
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2026 15:21:18 +1000
From: Neil Jenkins <neilj@fastmailteam.com>
To: JMAP IETF <jmap@ietf.org>
Message-Id: <8a2a68e9-89cb-4dcf-a6b1-ffb7717e1515@dogfoodapp.fastmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <285f7f35-05ee-4f10-bfbd-2028fcc5bbb1@app.fastmail.com>
References: <285f7f35-05ee-4f10-bfbd-2028fcc5bbb1@app.fastmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="be573c598f1d2e29fc896e27828fc7ed6d994072"
Message-ID-Hash: 5OVG4PIKH7FLURRTWSYDZ45U65RY573O
X-Message-ID-Hash: 5OVG4PIKH7FLURRTWSYDZ45U65RY573O
X-MailFrom: neilj@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/FEVbGytKoaP4OFpF45q3JVv5W8o>
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>
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] 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