[JMAP] Re: Question about shareWith property in RFC 9670 vs RFC 8621
Mauro De Gennaro <mauro@stalw.art> Wed, 01 October 2025 16:41 UTC
Return-Path: <mauro@stalw.art>
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 CEF9C6BEDA64 for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Oct 2025 09:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at ietf.org
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, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_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=stalw.art header.b="mDEoBzVs"; dkim=neutral reason="invalid (unsupported algorithm ed25519-sha256)" header.d=stalw.art header.b="XddIjeza"
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 9gwPeCeDhNlW for <jmap@mail2.ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Oct 2025 09:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.stalw.art (mail.stalw.art [135.181.195.209]) (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 40F736BEDA5A for <jmap@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 Oct 2025 09:41:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=202404r; d=stalw.art; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=Message-Id:To:Date:Subject:From; t=1759336892; bh=zRXmy/VCV8z9U+TS1j/VFBN ZVG0YWiyFXdCZvfnEfSk=; b=mDEoBzVs2AJKT/4kh7Ll1Fx5rCZVEjC4YFRLi49rB4AdXZ7L4f inZZAGDb4Lr1TQ0pZ4e68kJEr+Xex//Qx1dPCYfflc1tqkHfFyH1nddn+0D7gHkDhPPIThSVlp4 vhzNMFmpK+ZebCIeksNM70TfPBPWO/q89olQQY7rvzfEiGEKQH3spHe4eawSRfB3Vi0oCZHNJvx h98cDPsFgxGYAhc6EPN2p87sQI8tQCZJp2ufBOaNJUrmkbY9AGf63QdS8GeCh+bXQhFq51zUr/C 9zyYPX+d6aNeQtGCHqTI6rUwv+01ybvHOkbHfo5Fu2zL3zMUaIVoqZe1/X50SgPHsPg==;
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; s=202404e; d=stalw.art; c=relaxed/relaxed; h=Message-Id:To:Date:Subject:From; t=1759336892; bh=zRXmy/VCV8z9U+TS1j/VFBN ZVG0YWiyFXdCZvfnEfSk=; b=XddIjezaOZpdgyUmB3DbVp4Wi/uxw+kKotpVnLLO1Z7DEvJyaq 9iqXhjtTaYXye2kjHA3V0OktSfn+MFgHq1Ag==;
From: Mauro De Gennaro <mauro@stalw.art>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6C08310C-6D8A-4F3B-8CAF-488DECB7059F"
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 16.0 \(3731.700.6.1.11\))
Date: Wed, 01 Oct 2025 18:41:21 +0200
References: <FEA43A8C-F1A5-4EB8-A87F-40DCC8ADAF84@stalw.art> <37d6ab50-361b-4186-8edd-580171d91084@dogfoodapp.fastmail.com>
To: IETF JMAP Mailing List <jmap@ietf.org>
In-Reply-To: <37d6ab50-361b-4186-8edd-580171d91084@dogfoodapp.fastmail.com>
Message-Id: <CAABD276-625B-46F1-B800-0B2BE232F80D@stalw.art>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3731.700.6.1.11)
Message-ID-Hash: 3KHIKN6H4Q3MMASSKHPCD4JNL2N6C7N2
X-Message-ID-Hash: 3KHIKN6H4Q3MMASSKHPCD4JNL2N6C7N2
X-MailFrom: mauro@stalw.art
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: Question about shareWith property in RFC 9670 vs RFC 8621
List-Id: JSON Meta Access Protocol <jmap.ietf.org>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/jmap/wF_R8FfZv-cOdcb8ng0pMVO1soY>
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>
> Apologies for the delay replying, I've been on vacation. No worries! >> I’m currently working on an implementation of RFC 9670, and I’ve run into something I’d like to clarify. In Section 4 (Framework for Shared Data), it says that shareable data types MUST define the properties isSubscribed, myRights, and shareWith. That all makes sense, but when I went back to RFC 8621, I couldn’t find a definition for the shareWith property. > > You haven't missed anything! There's no current standard for setting ACLs for mailboxes via JMAP. It would be fairly trivial to define as an extension (basically just adding the shareWith property in accordance with RFC9670), but it's not currently defined. Perhaps you'd like to contribute a document for this? Sure! I’m currently working on implementing JMAP for Contacts, Calendars, and File Storage, but I’m hoping to be able to submit a draft for Email sharing in a few months, along with drafts for JMAP Metadata and Server Settings. Also, I’m going to implement the ContactCard/parse method in Stalwart, which isn’t defined in RFC 9610, so that might be another extension worth considering. Best, Mauro
- [JMAP] Question about shareWith property in RFC 9… Mauro De Gennaro
- [JMAP] Re: Question about shareWith property in R… Neil Jenkins
- [JMAP] Re: Question about shareWith property in R… Mauro De Gennaro