Re: [Jmap] I-D Action: draft-ietf-jmap-sieve-02.txt

Ken Murchison <murch@fastmail.com> Thu, 19 November 2020 15:49 UTC

Return-Path: <murch@fastmail.com>
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 C40323A0C0A for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:54 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.098
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.098 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, NICE_REPLY_A=-0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=fastmail.com header.b=NSEO11bP; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=HZTCtLuX
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 nKC04yQX7WQD for <jmap@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout2-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 902CB3A0C03 for <jmap@ietf.org>; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 07:49:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id EEBB1E26; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:49:51 -0500 (EST)
Received: from mailfrontend1 ([10.202.2.162]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:49:52 -0500
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com; h= subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date:mime-version :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=fm1; bh=z H7wDfWSOBc1cWt59ymBH69uwgzEF+0WStRxlVwRDs4=; b=NSEO11bP2nXT0uHPE IZbjIu9f+sQGz0D+Bdq7Zr79G9XyCmhGDUdsFg+rGdkmBB9EY4B/aHcKxT/q2FCf oAngZHHFR0kKvRm24XLI/0gS26tsj6a6OXrxt9e53uheThUwTHy+NMcDva+sqSLQ T72NaRJWhqSh0P6AHbpZT6UFzwEGsp6lMnaUvXGhJwuSmzQsIIuhUALjd1s9Muxw b1cXUbevc8Cse1Jkx/xWAjY0rjgSbTIhO9fbYHt1rlpGfnq0s4p/YhCy/jPxL+pa KGyO6uN+VWFJ3XBjDdOQj5dA3rPzLTTrVFQ4x9+CsDkEGWYnAth2X4rV9ilt78rb gj3cw==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender :x-sasl-enc; s=fm1; bh=zH7wDfWSOBc1cWt59ymBH69uwgzEF+0WStRxlVwRD s4=; b=HZTCtLuXeyAdy8ffY82S5T36iod/71a5KdYSRSBud4kMBIyjKX6JpORHP AZ41OMDsfd02pho/HuoEdQshA1C8hSKVa2zaMNnisme4CHB5XixZtmqZk2Dluyqi kOBj2Nrs5SnntkDJBLLK/L+4h8RTuDu9cc8xEddq09TWFNQfPrLTIiaPM1vzgzFS bvTnd/9+RBctXqiEuXdRmmoGBBS3kTWSap0rbTFrd8RKFZDVMRXaAn5MCuA+9Jxo MS1P8/j9pGtgz3pZ1/Sn1ZPHaHLLpVAwIicNjGPIuM9P+CC+bt2Qy584bAHMJnm8 5zzx9aOedBd1z7WLSNJG0FrkeZ4ng==
X-ME-Sender: <xms:H5S2X7fz-GqFYenbjidp3OqPYi8NawvbBzIT0DLAR7sYFGuwjTEqyA> <xme:H5S2XxNLoN3SSM-97HLXI5zdWrMrA3mLaaR5UBvQlo7HLCyGHocMlo4ZozYQ5Fbew URRkI0Tij8X2A>
X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedujedrudefjedgkedtucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdfqfgfvpdfurfetoffkrfgpnffqhgen uceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnhhtshculddquddttddmne cujfgurhepuffvfhfhkffffgggjggtgfesthekredttdefjeenucfhrhhomhepmfgvnhcu ofhurhgthhhishhonhcuoehmuhhrtghhsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrtghomheqnecuggftrf grthhtvghrnhephefhgfetleeuveeutdfhfeeuvdeukefgkeejueeuhfdtleehteffgfdv teeuueejnecukfhppeejgedrjeejrdekhedrvdehtdenucevlhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpe dtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehmuhhrtghhsehfrghsthhmrghilhdrtgho mh
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:H5S2X0hhlwedMPv1eFMKh5TAfzL0TbC63jQxqN3HtawTnFB2JihAoQ> <xmx:H5S2X8-HHqCe3Yy43mnZ91zgmJT8PTrmoZXABxPb51B51LkwrtCO8g> <xmx:H5S2X3uRG4yBSei6A6nszy0kF6R-tvdXMxsflqKBM52gKSjpWoU2hQ> <xmx:H5S2X06tzTZKb6wgiEzGbfV2N_HG-wvVWPQIABzYoijo5oNTKgoFlQ>
Received: from [192.168.1.22] (cpe-74-77-85-250.buffalo.res.rr.com [74.77.85.250]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 43D8A3280066; Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:49:51 -0500 (EST)
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
Cc: jmap@ietf.org
References: <160431690732.22434.10293492942158194310@ietfa.amsl.com> <36838c43-aefb-c7f9-d973-2e6f8df5e78f@open-xchange.com> <01RS6NIC0KZC005PTU@mauve.mrochek.com> <a044b1cb-97e0-a9da-4d6b-084f817d0c20@fastmail.com> <01RS6QFKSX1U0085YQ@mauve.mrochek.com> <26b87332-75b7-9c98-7eab-482e4c4c427d@fastmail.com> <01RS6RYJNF060085YQ@mauve.mrochek.com>
From: Ken Murchison <murch@fastmail.com>
Message-ID: <7d0a23d6-7bf0-684a-5c4b-f5350c5e2da2@fastmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:49:50 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <01RS6RYJNF060085YQ@mauve.mrochek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/wFHenvh-ae56Zl_W5SukwaTcFCM>
Subject: Re: [Jmap] I-D Action: draft-ietf-jmap-sieve-02.txt
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: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 15:49:55 -0000

On 11/19/20 10:34 AM, Ned Freed wrote:
>
>> On 11/19/20 9:54 AM, Ned Freed wrote:
>> >> Don't we have the same single-script/multi-script client issue with
>> >> managesieve?
>> >
>> > Yes. That's kind of the point.
>> >
>> >> Or perhaps I'm not fully understanding your concern.
>> >
>> >> A separate question that comes to mind, is do we want JMAP Sieve 
>> servers
>> >> to be able to only support a single script?  I guess in this case, 
>> the
>> >> server could simply have a single script with id "singleton" which 
>> can
>> >> only be updated and (de)activated.  Any attempt to create another 
>> script
>> >> or destroy the existing one would fail with a "singleton" error.
>> >
>> > Indeed. It seems like we're asking a lot of clients here. And if the
>> > past is
>> > any indication, we're likely to be disappointed by what we get.
>
>
>> So, its sounds like you're making an argument that JMAP Sieve should
>> always operate on a singleton.  Am I correct?
>
> No, not really. I'm saying that the managesieve model has issues that
> warrant serious consideration before we adopt it in a different context.
>
> The single sieve model is the obvious alternative, but it may not be 
> the only
> one. Since none of this is especially difficult server-side, I would 
> like to
> hear from client devleopers what sort of model they would prefer. Or if
> the multisieve model is what they really want, have them say that.
>
>> Obviously, this takes the Sieve "include" extension of the table.
>
> No, not really. It just means you'd have to use some other means of 
> resolving
> the includes.


A user would have no way of managing their own included scripts, but 
they could still include system-wide global scripts in their own single 
script if desired.


>
> (Not that I'd mind. I think include is a botch.)

-- 
Kenneth Murchison
Senior Software Developer
Fastmail US LLC