IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [plasma] why not web portal mail?

Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se> Tue, 12 April 2011 20:55 UTC

Return-Path: <leifj@mnt.se>
X-Original-To: plasma@ietfc.amsl.com
Delivered-To: plasma@ietfc.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5719CE093F for <plasma@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:55:26 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([208.66.40.236]) by localhost (ietfc.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id D2DS6rCRNSvZ for <plasma@ietfc.amsl.com>; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from backup-server.nordu.net (backup-server.nordu.net [IPv6:2001:948:4:1::66]) by ietfc.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4E461E0933 for <plasma@ietf.org>; Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:55:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [172.20.10.2] ([2.67.94.19]) (authenticated bits=0) by backup-server.nordu.net (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p3CKtDI8004856 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:55:20 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <4DA4BC30.7060308@mnt.se>
Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 22:55:12 +0200
From: Leif Johansson <leifj@mnt.se>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.2.14) Gecko/20110223 Lightning/1.0b2 Thunderbird/3.1.8
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Trevor Freeman <trevorf@exchange.microsoft.com>
References: <E545B914D50B2A4B994F198378B1525D2F49734F@DF-M14-12.exchange.corp.microsoft.com> <4DA45FE5.3020102@mnt.se> <E545B914D50B2A4B994F198378B1525D339D7F4B@DF-M14-11.exchange.corp.microsoft.com>
In-Reply-To: <E545B914D50B2A4B994F198378B1525D339D7F4B@DF-M14-11.exchange.corp.microsoft.com>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Cc: "plasma@ietf.org" <plasma@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [plasma] why not web portal mail?
X-BeenThere: plasma@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: "The PoLicy Augmented S/Mime \(plasma\) bof discussion list." <plasma.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/plasma>, <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/plasma>
List-Post: <mailto:plasma@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/plasma>, <mailto:plasma-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 20:55:26 -0000

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 04/12/2011 08:41 PM, Trevor Freeman wrote:
> If you consider XMPP case it is easier because there is no expectation of data persistence. It's a synchronous protocol where all parties are online together exchanging information and that information is not persisted one the session is ended.

Ah no most XMPP deployments does store-and-forward (offline messages I
think its called).

	Cheers Leif
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iEYEARECAAYFAk2kvDAACgkQ8Jx8FtbMZnfongCgu7sduGW6QTtVvMT92BQ9sBlg
TZ4AoI+LlDt54aLH3Uq/f5dZPRd04rVY
=q8qS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email