[JMAP] Re: Email Delivery Push Notifications — extend to SSE and/or WebSockets?
arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no Thu, 13 August 2026 22:21 UTC
Return-Path: <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
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 0D7B91296BD3F for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 15:21:11 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ietf.org; s=ietf1; t=1786659671; bh=Bpflrur960KIbXPItf6Fqj4/SFmUnJbUROBmNTuRWxc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References; b=P0SwVZ4BtilysSeSLr0yMYpCc6CktOWV1ur1BwZKZ5k2YuHRcfLiWIIMB5U2YvM+n WG4cvXJfftBUBofXn77WVtigogKiXIy75jmJtcLxGJdKlaFv9m5jr4rTaqnVrA3kIt oJaDZQ9MTT2UFqHbVILxAOV4VDJ4rywbxpFG6b4Y=
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.097
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.097 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_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: mail2.ietf.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=gulbrandsen.priv.no
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 d0ECQw8J76PE for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 15:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [144.76.73.169]) (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 4D2C11296BD2D for <jmap@ietf.org>; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 15:21:10 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gulbrandsen.priv.no; s=mail; t=1786659661; bh=Bpflrur960KIbXPItf6Fqj4/SFmUnJbUROBmNTuRWxc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:From; b=LTOpD828XlN39gJLzVJflj2QxLuVBQ0BOqCEH2eyshUN7SreKRp1jPfkq/+PXFkD3 TolbjBbWywJoXAQB0/3LJALpO4vl4aSrTqLPb4LHjS5CB7odQS9HrgPeFlZ7XjorAM 5CflAlc4vdNn48ygBoXzrc/9RpiyKxue2Yp81YKk=
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Postfix) with ESMTP id 23999C0025; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 23:21:01 +0100 (IST)
Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.2.0) with esmtpsa id 1786659660-21809-21807/10/33229; Thu, 13 Aug 2026 22:21:00 +0000
From: arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no
To: jmap@ietf.org, Neil Jenkins <neilj=40fastmailteam.com@dmarc.ietf.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2026 00:20:56 +0200
Message-Id: <SXkZaf2pE+f8WN35zeDEd3uiohWk7I5PNZrx5u6hTPo=.sha-256@antelope.email>
References: <fb5dd6ed-1978-4c39-a879-508dd83de3f8@app.dogfood.fastmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="https://antelope.email"
Message-ID-Hash: MJVXNNT67ZUINOXI4DL5DL6IOHUEKFF3
X-Message-ID-Hash: MJVXNNT67ZUINOXI4DL5DL6IOHUEKFF3
X-MailFrom: arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no
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: Email Delivery Push Notifications — extend to SSE and/or WebSockets?
List-Id: JSON Meta Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/PGn1gLv_oIrrhPzPu7vAUI3-Fzg>
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>
What arguments do they put forward? It's so easy to disregard requests like this because there's a bad reason to ask (symmetry in this case), but there can be good reasons in addition to the bad one. Arnt On 2026-08-13 Neil Jenkins wrote: > I got an email from someone asking about whether the Email > Delivery Push Notifications > <https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-jmap-emailpush-03.html> > should be extended to add support over the SSE push channel > and/or WebSockets if also supporting RFC8887 > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/rfc8887/>. On the one hand I > can see the consistency argument, but on the other it seems > simpler to keep it just over the PushSubscription channel, which > is what's needed for the primary use case of mobile devices that > have heavy restrictions on push notifications. What do other > people think? > Cheers, > Neil. > JMAP mailing list -- jmap@ietf.org > To unsubscribe send an email to jmap-leave@ietf.org
- [JMAP] Email Delivery Push Notifications — extend… Neil Jenkins
- [JMAP] Re: Email Delivery Push Notifications — ex… Mauro De Gennaro
- [JMAP] Re: Email Delivery Push Notifications — ex… Ben Bucksch
- [JMAP] Re: Email Delivery Push Notifications — ex… arnt
- [JMAP] Re: Email Delivery Push Notifications — ex… Neil Jenkins
- [JMAP] Re: Email Delivery Push Notifications — ex… arnt
- [JMAP] Re: Email Delivery Push Notifications — ex… Mia Kanashi