IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Jmap] Call for adoption: JMAP QUOTA

Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no> Fri, 06 September 2019 08:07 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 8DCC4120098 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 01:07:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.998
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.998 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] 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 Sf8alBLlYIe6 for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 01:07:42 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no [IPv6:2a01:4f8:191:91a8::3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1A67C12007C for <jmap@ietf.org>; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 01:07:41 -0700 (PDT)
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 33758C00EE; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 09:10:56 +0100 (IST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gulbrandsen.priv.no; s=mail; t=1567757456; bh=KdPQrTtccZV5bNiYhWeinsybqvVp5kyJ5NtO/cdCG7o=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:From; b=ZkWk0gixoabjF9Uctf2ZWLN6DAgRMBhycO3J9sq0uzB4QzmsAEim379iGddyW+Ljw jt9hX8p+pSwHMnuBfO55CguVWoHhqdm0K1YI2MzegK2LPKcMxsqGB1Acp69cJTO9rn /UR/BeiGEo2AgW56pA90JRX+1ADVzao4lQol4wBQ=
Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by stabil.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.2.0) with esmtpsa id 1567757455-18747-18745/9/79; Fri, 6 Sep 2019 08:10:55 +0000
From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no>
To: jmap@ietf.org
Date: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 10:07:36 +0200
Message-Id: <3JsDnKuuU8BmlOR/U+XAJdVesldOC/B2YytQRSYoHQc=.sha-256@antelope.email>
References: <d90d5d6e-3c1a-4d90-875f-fc55de3c7c6f@beta.fastmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format="flowed"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/cZOrApWrmYE4jn9egJTk4sJOmmQ>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] Call for adoption: JMAP QUOTA
X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
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: Fri, 06 Sep 2019 08:07:43 -0000

If this is adopted, then I believe action item number one should be to 
consider why the IMAP equivalent was poorly supported, and number two 
to write principles for how to prevent the same problem (s).

Arnt

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email