Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) - reducing configuration complexity
Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Wed, 08 February 2017 13:11 UTC
Return-Path: <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
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 9EE08129A24 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:11:50 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gulbrandsen.priv.no
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 OsMoORQgb9nB for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:11:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from strange.aox.org (strange.aox.org [IPv6:2001:4d88:100c::1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B107A126DFB for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 05:11:49 -0800 (PST)
Received: from fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by strange.aox.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A360CEC00C; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:11:48 +0000 (UTC)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gulbrandsen.priv.no; s=mail; t=1486559508; bh=NMzHbhxGcFeP9YbAq6DAAGMJC3AHeQNks0V9nhW2P+4=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References:From; b=fSkMdDMQBc87f/Z9G1SkLPIwQzw1Q6dU0uB6Lf2jMJd7NLUfrH3NKmccPoEh1E9gS lyEYHfPZRyj2rTsL6OuCfKibuqIArRYdJ35CtMoVpNwb8eKk055HIuu/JkVgsOuZsU s9rpLYndxcyeDgdt5PrE5jm3xzZc8WXKFtnkJGnQ=
Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.2.0) with esmtpsa id 1486559507-14518-25938/11/4; Wed, 8 Feb 2017 13:11:47 +0000
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
To: jmap@ietf.org
Date: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 13:11:46 +0000
User-Agent: Trojita/v0.5-9-g8961725; Qt/4.8.6; X11; Linux; Devuan GNU/Linux 1.0 (jessie)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Message-Id: <75b30a3d-5364-4d84-a36e-efaa8821767f@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
In-Reply-To: <1486504179.3213069.873654632.4001B565@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References: <148616796247.4079.7104562493351135409.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <11e900d0-553e-0635-06f4-8510bd80ecfd@dcrocker.net> <4ff42a3b-1f8e-3e25-14e7-b1d3ed2f69c2@isode.com> <368f2b68-8f10-9517-1edb-d213ff10563b@dcrocker.net> <1486435969.2314063.872594064.21072F60@webmail.messagingengine.com> <CAMQk0F-Xgkd7D8k1KmzpGdUKV7q8FERCrSh_weJ6MaioAE=dbQ@mail.gmail.com> <c2e15625-2241-603e-080d-8593b87e0bca@dcrocker.net> <1486504179.3213069.873654632.4001B565@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/M-Hcy_RbsptjVcvphFaSI299QZQ>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) - reducing configuration complexity
X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: Wed, 08 Feb 2017 13:11:50 -0000
Bron Gondwana writes: > This reasoning is why so many non-IETF protocols have been > gaining marketshare in the client space. The underlying > protocols need to support usable interface design, and be simple > enough to implement that somebody who wants to write a great new > email client doesn't spend their first 6 months fighting the > protocols and then give up. This, +1. There are things I don't like about the JMAP document. Noone seems to bring any of them up. Instead we get things like "IETF protocols in this space must support having one password for sending mail and another for reading". Bleh. Arnt
- [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (jmap) The IESG
- Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (… Randy Bush
- Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (… Arnt Gulbrandsen
- Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (… Alexey Melnikov
- Re: [Jmap] WG Review: JSON Mail Access Protocol (… Phillip Hallam-Baker