From nobody Thu Jan 19 06:42:39 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jmap@ietf.org Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7A96129601; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:18:51 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Alissa Cooper" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.40.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <148483553190.10414.16406004864188892845.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:18:51 -0800 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:42:38 -0800 Cc: jmap@ietf.org, jmap-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [Jmap] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:18:53 -0000 Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-jmap/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- I don't think I saw response to the early list comments asking for elaboration on the "many companies and projects" implementing this. It might make more sense to replace the first sentence with something like "A number of JSON-based representations of email have been developed that are proprietary, non-standard, and incompatible with each other." From nobody Thu Jan 19 06:42:43 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jmap@ietf.org Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2D8A1295F6; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:19:53 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Spencer Dawkins" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.40.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <148483559392.10373.17249140520814827896.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:19:53 -0800 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:42:38 -0800 Cc: jmap@ietf.org, jmap-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [Jmap] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:19:54 -0000 Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: Yes When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-jmap/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Just a couple of nits for your consideration. I find the use of "mobile" as a noun to be unnatural in this text: "These protocols are proliferating due to existing standards being insufficient or poorly suited to the environments they are operating in, particularly mobile and webmail." Perhaps "mobile devices and webmail"? If this paragraph: "The JMAP working group will specify an mechanism to allow clients to both view and send email from a server over a single stateless HTTPS channel with minimal round trips. A single protocol for receipt and submission will resolve long-standing difficulties users face setting up clients to talk to servers. The use of multiple protocols to perform actions within a single application creates significant support challenges, as users may get a variety of partial failure modes (for example, can receive email, but can not send new messages). This is further exacerbated if the different protocols are authenticated separately." was rearranged so that it describes a problem and, in a separate paragraph, says what the working group will do to resolve the problem, that would be easier for me to parse. I'm thinking of something like this: "The use of multiple protocols to perform actions within a single application creates significant support challenges, as users may get a variety of partial failure modes (for example, can receive email, but can not send new messages). This is further exacerbated if the different protocols are authenticated separately. The JMAP working group will specify an mechanism to allow clients to both view and send email from a server over a single stateless HTTPS channel with minimal round trips. A single protocol for receipt and submission will resolve long-standing difficulties users face setting up clients to talk to servers." From nobody Thu Jan 19 06:42:46 2017 Return-Path: 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 D9CA61295FB; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:22:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=Nl0pSqIX; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=oavFy7uu 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 k0JpmkAhny-A; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:22:57 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B11E01295D0; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:22:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 220BB20918; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:22:51 -0500 (EST) Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:22:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=4oTwx8kIhYoIwhYP5LEb/5GMuR w=; b=Nl0pSqIX6ZzYLpoV2FGU6ktW0AVldOuIK5nhfBXdXJSsX97AZ18K/yZh5d bwd62Sar2aYvjihsSXN0XsnxMkTRDxf9QTRsZS/f6IqeHibATud2JK7vWvp77oMC c14lD1DXTwk/GxmkHC3Jo7I0Tribpa//wAzHeKeom4WlPoVJo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; 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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=4o Twx8kIhYoIwhYP5LEb/5GMuRw=; b=oavFy7uumaRGeNpEGF/6QJdpGorSJjbsNS GqQGBmJ2xKYg9XPkhS4CAlZir0Ig/arz1SZwM7BvAl1lnDCQ+magrh5mxTH5vF00 A5Wqnjtx7iSn7K70SfYyRkxE9IXRU1hWABAzgXxlv8S11XYPLrdqGl8UW+ynpFS8 yszzLoo4U= X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id B2BD76ABF3; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:22:51 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1484835771.433488.852888712.32E85117@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Alexey Melnikov To: Alissa Cooper , The IESG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-ebcecf34 Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:22:51 +0000 References: <148483553190.10414.16406004864188892845.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> In-Reply-To: <148483553190.10414.16406004864188892845.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:42:38 -0800 Cc: jmap@ietf.org, jmap-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Jmap] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:22:59 -0000 Hi Alissa, On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:18 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote: > Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: Yes > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > I don't think I saw response to the early list comments asking for > elaboration on the "many companies and projects" implementing this. It > might make more sense to replace the first sentence with something like > "A number of JSON-based representations of email have been developed that > are proprietary, non-standard, and incompatible with each other." There was a response, I can dig it out. But yes, I am happy to change the sentence as suggested. Best Regards, Alexey From nobody Thu Jan 19 06:42:49 2017 Return-Path: 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 08FC2129605; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:24:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=iV5Ecw9+; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=PF6DsXbv 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 pQYCAOATQWoS; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:24:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id BEA00129602; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:24:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D44D20B08; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:24:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:24:06 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=Sl+QK2R+EQuwx4Kvav4zBtE3pU c=; b=iV5Ecw9+kmEHDxk2iUH5B3DisLBBde3wlcLHfyX0R4btce/mnSkJf87hnm RuWkZU9uaRDhVlvIWPoO5HArHDQgushcMZbWmq6nkoikAzLMg7Jgki6usHYLjCDP S/im2i2iG90XnGvS9cVwnNis9WTbM6BhWh9D5QNwFVTU4zfw0= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; 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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=Sl +QK2R+EQuwx4Kvav4zBtE3pUc=; b=PF6DsXbvDtQctiQft4SL0vvtqvodejMU4P +luvk/E0AP6UbtZYUCgB1XG3YZrqVl7xiNwNAcklUVzRkqwiZ3S/3Ruwa6KgGvkB mEIdwjHk3bYMnK4GTgVvBdDSOLG323YMc52ehnlVXuorOjFYDFdI+uMbdqZhlMeC MEJZxZiD8= X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 073CB6ABF3; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:24:05 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1484835845.433686.852890768.7058EE5D@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Alexey Melnikov To: Spencer Dawkins , The IESG MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-ebcecf34 In-Reply-To: <148483559392.10373.17249140520814827896.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:24:05 +0000 References: <148483559392.10373.17249140520814827896.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:42:38 -0800 Cc: jmap@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Jmap] Spencer Dawkins' Yes on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:24:08 -0000 Hi Spencer, On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:19 PM, Spencer Dawkins wrote: > Spencer Dawkins has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: Yes > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Just a couple of nits for your consideration. > > I find the use of "mobile" as a noun to be unnatural in this text: > > "These protocols are proliferating due > to existing standards being insufficient or poorly suited to the > environments they are operating in, particularly mobile and webmail." > > Perhaps "mobile devices and webmail"? > > If this paragraph: > > "The JMAP working group will specify an mechanism to allow clients to > both view and send email from a server over a single stateless HTTPS > channel with minimal round trips. A single protocol for receipt and > submission will resolve long-standing difficulties users face > setting up clients to talk to servers. The use of multiple protocols > to perform actions within a single application creates significant > support challenges, as users may get a variety of partial failure modes > (for example, can receive email, but can not send new messages). > This is further exacerbated if the different protocols are > authenticated separately." > > was rearranged so that it describes a problem and, in a separate > paragraph, says what the working group will do to resolve the problem, > that would be easier for me to parse. > > I'm thinking of something like this: > > "The use of multiple protocols > to perform actions within a single application creates significant > support challenges, as users may get a variety of partial failure modes > (for example, can receive email, but can not send new messages). > This is further exacerbated if the different protocols are > authenticated separately. > > The JMAP working group will specify an mechanism to allow clients to > both view and send email from a server over a single stateless HTTPS > channel with minimal round trips. A single protocol for receipt and > submission will resolve long-standing difficulties users face > setting up clients to talk to servers." Sounds good to me. From nobody Thu Jan 19 06:42:51 2017 Return-Path: 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 7866E129602; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:33:22 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.721 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.721 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cooperw.in header.b=gJmTlu0n; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=SaccqdF7 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 OTpdQ_Im_9iX; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:33:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6082E12952C; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:33:21 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id BC4B620A59; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:33:20 -0500 (EST) Received: from frontend2 ([10.202.2.161]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:33:20 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cooperw.in; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=FiTDsbcs7k7rE7Z LqW6nJsom3Jw=; b=gJmTlu0nE7rzFcfpobFT8GFXFAtM7068cICjdhFEqodsl1K XkbNevRqaUd7RD95LD4pJToX6/6Pm3NaajRa11an8q8CNOR5Y+ILoTqJ4f2RncLN pifvtDnS2/bGUBeeQ65atXBD3rSHPeLa5LB2IzRaEO4gJ95k6Yzy3kFtmubg= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; 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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s= smtpout; bh=FiTDsbcs7k7rE7ZLqW6nJsom3Jw=; b=SaccqdF757WeAgeNdrr1 pjutEVpY2SMSdJrkWoYKFCFVJFWxKOr7VsHB1t/zOXn1dcsYGuIFZZIFF/7USrl4 4HzMpk/1VUGnCrvi1dYJUAh69d50FaPc1iJ+jbJjZBlqtIAvc/7zKo+2hTWAd4zP ZsBGjzFjOjwARxX4HIWRc8k= X-ME-Sender: X-Sasl-enc: v34aT1bdWaIrneNf27jBYgpIysMcdG/P0/XfG3v4htV8 1484836400 Received: from sjc-alcoop-8818.cisco.com (unknown [128.107.241.165]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id C8DDF244AE; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:33:19 -0500 (EST) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) From: Alissa Cooper In-Reply-To: <1484835771.433488.852888712.32E85117@webmail.messagingengine.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 09:33:18 -0500 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3A0D3DAB-870E-4140-9FB8-44E59B03FFD0@cooperw.in> References: <148483553190.10414.16406004864188892845.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1484835771.433488.852888712.32E85117@webmail.messagingengine.com> To: Alexey Melnikov X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:42:38 -0800 Cc: jmap@ietf.org, The IESG , jmap-chairs@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Jmap] Alissa Cooper's Yes on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:33:22 -0000 > On Jan 19, 2017, at 9:22 AM, Alexey Melnikov = wrote: >=20 > Hi Alissa, >=20 > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:18 PM, Alissa Cooper wrote: >> Alissa Cooper has entered the following ballot position for >> charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: Yes >=20 >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >> COMMENT: >> = ---------------------------------------------------------------------- >>=20 >> I don't think I saw response to the early list comments asking for >> elaboration on the "many companies and projects" implementing this. = It >> might make more sense to replace the first sentence with something = like >> "A number of JSON-based representations of email have been developed = that >> are proprietary, non-standard, and incompatible with each other." >=20 > There was a response, I can dig it out. No need to dig =E2=80=94 I just did a quick scan before the telechat so = I must have missed it. Alissa > But yes, I am happy to change > the sentence as suggested. >=20 > Best Regards, > Alexey From nobody Thu Jan 19 07:29:17 2017 Return-Path: X-Original-To: jmap@ietf.org Delivered-To: jmap@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2140A129463; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:46:24 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: "Alvaro Retana" To: "The IESG" X-Test-IDTracker: no X-IETF-IDTracker: 6.40.3 Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Precedence: bulk Message-ID: <148483718409.10344.13128978116169740904.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 06:46:24 -0800 Archived-At: X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 07:29:15 -0800 Cc: jmap@ietf.org, jmap-chairs@ietf.org Subject: [Jmap] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:46:24 -0000 Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: No Objection When responding, please keep the subject line intact and reply to all email addresses included in the To and CC lines. (Feel free to cut this introductory paragraph, however.) The document, along with other ballot positions, can be found here: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/charter-ietf-jmap/ ---------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMENT: ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Given the description, which includes hints at the pain current solutions result in, I would think that the first deliverable (problem statement) is not needed. If the WG needs to work on a problem statement then perhaps the problem is not full understood yet... From nobody Thu Jan 19 07:45:10 2017 Return-Path: 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 A2606129460 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 07:45:08 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.72 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.72 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=cr5ndVnW; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=jlG9XETK 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 meQVSY4eZUpv for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 07:45:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id B9DDA129618 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 07:45:06 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3622620AD9 for ; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 10:45:06 -0500 (EST) Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Jan 2017 10:45:06 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id :mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= mesmtp; bh=RXUiQZfKUTXq9by2cqEFbPdstWM=; b=cr5ndVnWypb/+NQ6ZyMy9 Uao4SH4RRVs9t66p7zefa+TW/7HN99MsmPo82yVSJof6aMDECU8M67T8ysPq8AdO xaTK5Gr7982qVmsKh5okKd0u1tq3BidQU1yfyueZNbAK2L75SHh3ULv2vXGf/4ue MY4inAOEd4q7Dtvko1ADAo= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=RXUiQZfKUTXq9by2cqEFbPdst WM=; b=jlG9XETKwfnD6v4nserbQbgs7Gg3cGXrGXzbqMtrUseoMqsbxD5hisT/f BeDil99apcqh/Iyfn2BtWeA1Tf83uV3i+6jAEsvGSppFkHqgoRl6Yt+7GrdMdRfR rVmVPDyBWewx1JWiqMf0IUubWa2MI+yiJxTmrVaWfyl9P1gbXk= X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 1ACE36ABF3; Thu, 19 Jan 2017 10:45:06 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1484840706.449947.852985536.035C2C9B@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Alexey Melnikov To: jmap@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-ebcecf34 X-Forwarded-Message-Id: <1484837810.440788.852924392.1C06EC4E@webmail.messagingengine.com> Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 15:45:06 +0000 Archived-At: Subject: [Jmap] Fwd: Re: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 15:45:08 -0000 [Forwarding my reply, as I accidentally discarded it in the Mailman moderation queue.] ----- Original message ----- From: Alexey Melnikov To: Alvaro Retana , The IESG Cc: jmap@ietf.org Subject: Re: Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) Date: Thu, 19 Jan 2017 14:56:50 +0000 Hi Alvaro, On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:46 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote: > Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for > charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: No Objection > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > COMMENT: > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Given the description, which includes hints at the pain current solutions > result in, I would think that the first deliverable (problem statement) > is not needed. The charter says that it might not be published as an RFC. > If the WG needs to work on a problem statement then perhaps the problem > is not full understood yet... I think the problem is understood in certain circles, but there might be some disagreement on details. I found current discussions on problems to be a rather interesting read, because I ran into many of them (and fixed when I could). I think this document would be useful to implementors and protocol designers. Best Regards, Alexey From nobody Wed Jan 25 10:45:40 2017 Return-Path: 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 26C5B129ADE; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:45:39 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.719 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.fm header.b=JMRIRKj5; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=UPkUv9Og 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 T6rKslx-lovj; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:45:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4EE05129AD4; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:45:37 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute7.internal (compute7.nyi.internal [10.202.2.47]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 807CB2071D; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:45:36 -0500 (EST) Received: from web5 ([10.202.2.215]) by compute7.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:45:36 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.fm; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=RYQJQhmNNfTgp1qRl5tJ0uSudm w=; b=JMRIRKj5nRnvR2ZSqY3vdKv1jaqvAJ8xd21BxQFgzfy70/XtzAv2Y5ZSE0 y2+DaCJMpAoiegkVaFCd6KjNo1xTAoZBwxN591mINShI2KeaUK33TRUqKgURFUl9 XbnZXtwsj/gllyCbiOx+aHoowwgj7UzxAeRttHR6mXFiu64EM= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; 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-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=RY QJQhmNNfTgp1qRl5tJ0uSudmw=; b=UPkUv9OgMPiPHKnlf4ABrUX41/RqywaPhu hby5Pktm99rx8yuBsSfzMNQ9v+uWmEj5B5aB+bSfGq2v0S0TTahO0VFIvWeqm/p2 EvbfqaUdc9vwIE4RrymIiIJXqW3a9AJtYdF9LtRCloSbtjMZCMSKQKWyp3zAp/mQ oFsfG1tWw= X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 5ACFE6ABF7; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:45:36 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1485369936.4034056.859466120.5A41F7FA@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Alexey Melnikov To: Spencer Dawkins at IETF MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_148536993640340563" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-37809a74 In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 18:45:36 +0000 References: <148483718409.10344.13128978116169740904.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <1484837810.440788.852924392.1C06EC4E@webmail.messagingengine.com> Archived-At: Cc: Alvaro Retana , The IESG , jmap@ietf.org Subject: Re: [Jmap] Alvaro Retana's No Objection on charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: (with COMMENT) X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 18:45:39 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --_----------=_148536993640340563 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Spencer, On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 03:04 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote: > Hi, Alexey, > > On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Alexey Melnikov > wrote: >> Hi Alvaro, >> >> On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:46 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote: >> > Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for charter-ietf-jmap-00- >> > 04: No Objection >> >> > ----------------------------------------------------------------- >> > ----- >> > COMMENT: >> > ------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > ---- >> > >> > Given the description, which includes hints at the pain current >> > solutions result in, I would think that the first deliverable >> > (problem statement) is not needed. >> >> The charter says that it might not be published as an RFC. >> >> > If the WG needs to work on a problem statement then perhaps the >> > problem is not full understood yet... >> >> I think the problem is understood in certain circles, but there >> might be >> some disagreement on details. I found current discussions on >> problems to >> be a rather interesting read, because I ran into many of them >> (and fixed >> when I could). I think this document would be useful to >> implementors and >> protocol designers. > > What I think I'm hearing you saying implicitly is "a lot of people are > trying a bunch of disconnected things, at least some of which are > dumb, and this document may help motivate those people to stop trying > things at random and implement what this working group comes up with". > > Is that a fair summary? Yes, pretty much. > > It's not what I usually think about, when we do problem statements in > TSV, but ART is different, so that could make sense. > > Spencer > >> Best Regards, >> Alexey >> --_----------=_148536993640340563 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
Hi Spencer,

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 03:04 PM, Spencer Dawkins at IETF wrote:
Hi, Alexey,

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017 at 8:56 AM, Alexey Melnikov <aamelnikov@fastmail.fm> wrote:
Hi Alvaro,

On Thu, Jan 19, 2017, at 02:46 PM, Alvaro Retana wrote:
> Alvaro Retana has entered the following ballot position for
> charter-ietf-jmap-00-04: No Objection

> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> COMMENT:
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Given the description, which includes hints at the pain current solutions
> result in, I would think that the first deliverable (problem statement)
> is not needed.

The charter says that it might not be published as an RFC.

> If the WG needs to work on a problem statement then perhaps the problem
> is not full understood yet...

I think the problem is understood in certain circles, but there might be
some disagreement on details. I found current discussions on problems to
be a rather interesting read, because I ran into many of them (and fixed
when I could). I think this document would be useful to implementors and
protocol designers.

What I think I'm hearing you saying implicitly is "a lot of people are trying a bunch of disconnected things, at least some of which are dumb, and this document may help motivate those people to stop trying things at random and implement what this working group comes up with".

Is that a fair summary?
Yes, pretty much.


It's not what I usually think about, when we do problem statements in TSV, but ART is different, so that could make sense.

Spencer
 
Best Regards,
Alexey


--_----------=_148536993640340563-- From roderick@simul.co.uk Wed Jan 25 10:53:45 2017 Return-Path: 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 A852E129AEC for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:53:45 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.92 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.92 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 1RL-AnMc7T_D for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:53:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from delivery.mailspamprotection.com (delivery.mailspamprotection.com [184.154.205.38]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EA471129ADC for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 10:53:43 -0800 (PST) Received: from c7085.sgvps.net ([109.199.118.89]) by se5.mailspamprotection.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1cWShR-00079X-Fs for jmap@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:53:42 -0600 Received: from [85.199.243.158] (port=64068 helo=[192.168.3.9]) by c7085.sgvps.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cWShQ-0001Tx-9J for jmap@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:53:40 -0600 To: jmap@ietf.org From: Roderick Kennedy Organization: Simul Message-ID: <48b08ee6-d7e1-386f-81b6-908a957878f9@simul.co.uk> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 18:53:39 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - c7085.sgvps.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - simul.co.uk X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: c7085.sgvps.net: none X-Authenticated-Sender: c7085.sgvps.net: X-Originating-IP: 109.199.118.89 X-SpamExperts-Domain: c7085.sgvps.net X-SpamExperts-Username: 109.199.118.89 Authentication-Results: mailspamprotection.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=109.199.118.89@c7085.sgvps.net X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: ham X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.24) X-Filter-ID: s0sct1PQhAABKnZB5plbIS+5aUEa3WEUqd/zna7uu+lBVV3VcUT1TluckIxVI74R92PNDpgLsd6D dd/s7VM53gppdSHKUnxf6IaqfstuVnt5JZzLdlCqM7yRlf5UcYHY70hXFOFIrCtPQIcoUyVy9yQg PUqSEAxoLCJ0U4lx3gkj2FNK+n7DVOW++N+DTYxto5MiFoPaesQdNHJVdSC6uU/0Z2TNvp9XGTTx Id5BoPoUoYlySTGNxlPlF6ZGWFejBTBK6sXSP4MMeP5DfasmMpecjOJnOtAX81/JhAIF0+nCkdUp n8A2iMkLHL7hKRavnHl2TRtBFGxCwNLr/WIXTmhCmLzOxTAcQmFWVARhgNq4IECBswS7D9zMOUOD pe2iWJDhLUL/l5nzNzu0FS2Wjwoa+7ZxnbeOdCS9nzJ+R0nAr7Q0AcDQrFBakqLvbaDAqqjWwDCs 6qClMI3pTc/XZXgOrHGWcKc5AqOFqAQq4tIve4LvbEtHvp5mU5Mu//hRKxGNIFWk8PlDJl9le3C3 c6Pexo1nR5SneSpWYbV3tWS/AjCMGjaKtMCUhdz1b3HbjMhpwyKUnIZXKOkSA6DYPzB6AfvblXyj 02a3Cw6CrTRKSZM70BQ9J+GQnllo9NIkGplHcpVCCoX989hgB8R+yIxwY4abRzErGiAUWLIf7ene FPMo55lJnqmRmsnE+B6eKBPGxLduhzbXzDVctTrfEJPdammXzjgbhawwpvaSUg/FupO/gXodIqFe Vid6hBVoiEc3YcCUDBl3OGV65ZQULuQ0Yt6sBXejfJJliPYr+dlR+Q4vMTG8IlfmLKczzCOP1Itk ZNY85I+CB6nUlFGDoA== X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine1.mailspamprotection.com X-Recommended-Action: accept Archived-At: Subject: [Jmap] MIME vs message+attachment X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 19:03:23 -0000 Reading the JMAP spec, one thing that jumped out at me was the simplification of the MIME structure towards something more like what we see in client front ends: HTML and plaintext message versions, plus attachments. Is there any potential for some common ground that would retrieve the MIME structure, but in a JSON-friendly format? Apologies if I've misunderstood the spec. -- Roderick Kennedy From nobody Wed Jan 25 12:42:17 2017 Return-Path: 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 D12D8129BCE for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:42:14 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001] 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 qWu3FKbfRlXn for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:42:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from strange.aox.org (strange.aox.org [80.244.248.170]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 88175129BA8 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 12:42:11 -0800 (PST) Received: from fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by strange.aox.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D4FEFA0080; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:42:09 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gulbrandsen.priv.no; s=mail; t=1485376929; bh=ZJUJe1WXIOJk1oVGxPIaf6FYW8zEjngNnEM53WAIDtc=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:References:From; b=Si83qBpvyGlZqWD4nrXWbLAYqeEAIx2pZIuBio5X+x/bW93s8czv3F53P1HnvBZwS EoG30J1Di64Xp66oAUwXMtTE1YGthdBsyIV5xI8Q+dOY8BbgPfeXPNRqMXN19m4zzV 8ZQg3mswkbNqHw/eM9um7NAJKOpFnafJ2qRHh1cs= Received: from arnt@gulbrandsen.priv.no by fri.gulbrandsen.priv.no (Archiveopteryx 3.2.0) with esmtpsa id 1485376928-23923-23922/12/5; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:42:08 +0000 From: Arnt Gulbrandsen To: jmap@ietf.org, Roderick Kennedy Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 21:42:06 +0100 Message-Id: References: <48b08ee6-d7e1-386f-81b6-908a957878f9@simul.co.uk> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jmap] MIME vs message+attachment X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:42:15 -0000 Why? What is the use case? Arnt From nobody Wed Jan 25 13:11:50 2017 Return-Path: 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 549BF129B40 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:11:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.055 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.055 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.156] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=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 rynZM6hwcKlj for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:11:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from delivery.mailspamprotection.com (delivery.mailspamprotection.com [184.154.58.230]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 972AD129BFF for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 13:11:41 -0800 (PST) Received: from c7085.sgvps.net ([109.199.118.89]) by se10.mailspamprotection.com with esmtps (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384:256) (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1cWUqv-00043D-FV for jmap@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 15:11:40 -0600 Received: from [85.199.243.158] (port=7768 helo=[192.168.3.9]) by c7085.sgvps.net with esmtpsa (TLSv1.2:ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256:128) (Exim 4.87) (envelope-from ) id 1cWUqt-0001Kl-RC for jmap@ietf.org; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 15:11:35 -0600 To: jmap@ietf.org References: <48b08ee6-d7e1-386f-81b6-908a957878f9@simul.co.uk> From: Roderick Kennedy Organization: Simul Message-ID: <4ab1e46b-6c3e-c9b9-0c41-c103515d62a9@simul.co.uk> Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 21:11:34 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------9E004907754DD7E78FFCCABF" X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - c7085.sgvps.net X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - simul.co.uk X-Get-Message-Sender-Via: c7085.sgvps.net: none X-Authenticated-Sender: c7085.sgvps.net: X-Originating-IP: 109.199.118.89 X-SpamExperts-Domain: c7085.sgvps.net X-SpamExperts-Username: 109.199.118.89 Authentication-Results: mailspamprotection.com; auth=pass smtp.auth=109.199.118.89@c7085.sgvps.net X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Class: ham X-SpamExperts-Outgoing-Evidence: Combined (0.28) X-Filter-ID: s0sct1PQhAABKnZB5plbIS+5aUEa3WEUqd/zna7uu+lBVV3VcUT1TluckIxVI74R92PNDpgLsd6D dd/s7VM53gppdSHKUnxf6IaqfstuVnt5JZzLdlCqM7yRlf5UcYHY70hXFOFIrCtPQIcoUyVy98cT Fum4qXqT1A/K+m8ssj2pTNz3UWIfcKfxXSkIGYhpH9swX6NE6P50eutgX8pYP1CqH+RnayFnDD50 ZxhqMZ8UoYlySTGNxlPlF6ZGWFejBTBK6sXSP4MMeP5DfasmMpecjOJnOtAX81/JhAIF0+nCkdUp n8A2iMkLHL7hKRavnHl2TRtBFGxCwNLr/WIXTmhCmLzOxTAcQmFWVARhgNq4IECBswS7D9zMOUOD pe2iWJDhLUL/l5nzNzu0FS2Wj/uX/cKpsan3l+jz5mM9W2jIRJBup7Lo57z60vtnQmKBqqjWwDCs 6qClMI3pTc/XZXgOrHGWcKc5AqOFqAQq4tIve4LvbEtHvp5mU5Mu//hRKxGNIFWk8PlDJl9le3C3 c6Pexo1nR5SneSpWYbV3tWQqrzOd5NvzRvjC0h0PAjmanHl2TRtBFGxCwNLr/WIXTlp/3TgIM4oj TBFr687rGjvGLWY+MgHYxfRtKtuAsj1l++DuIQUs/5JJj4C/n4CILnxnA8Su7O4+djdrcdtGZrQI Mww1vZQR/0WP3kGoWV0t/jk0djIPP0IBmS14n23olhILjt1aLZ5BBY/PaE9SIeh0NIPnm11djM25 bP9NDHRbx45W6h2ctW+V1+EyMGTLxVItpNmHURF6jYEBDsakSw/CIjyT2O+gw+muqLi8v2+hU1P+ yN1qTLM7lhw0VnUFpg== X-Report-Abuse-To: spam@quarantine1.mailspamprotection.com X-Recommended-Action: accept Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jmap] MIME vs message+attachment X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 21:11:49 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------9E004907754DD7E78FFCCABF Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In general, clients that deal with something other than human-to-human text messages, but things that should not necessarily be considered simple attachments to human-readable text. It struck me when I first started IMAP/SMTP development that in the MIME design, it's only by convention that all emails even have human-readable text parts. So it seemed that the original intention was more broad than the text-attachment paradigm. ICS invitations are one example - some clients treat them as attachments, others handle them in their own right to connect to calendaring apps. I think one can distinguish between attachments (files that will usually be saved to disk or opened in an app) and more general MIME parts (data packets carrying some other meaning). And to allow that distinction might prove valuable in the future and allow for extensibility in terms of what email can support as a platform. But I do understand if this sort of thing is outside of JMAP's intended scope. On 25/01/2017 20:42, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote: > Why? What is the use case? > > Arnt > > _______________________________________________ > Jmap mailing list > Jmap@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap -- Roderick Kennedy --- Skype: roderick.kennedy twitter: rvkennedy LinkedIn: rvkennedy Simul trueSKY --------------9E004907754DD7E78FFCCABF Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In general, clients that deal with something other than human-to-human text messages, but things that should not necessarily be considered simple attachments to human-readable text.

It struck me when I first started IMAP/SMTP development that in the MIME design, it's only by convention that all emails even have human-readable text parts. So it seemed that the original intention was more broad than the text-attachment paradigm. ICS invitations are one example - some clients treat them as attachments, others handle them in their own right to connect to calendaring apps. I think one can distinguish between attachments (files that will usually be saved to disk or opened in an app) and more general MIME parts (data packets carrying some other meaning). And to allow that distinction might prove valuable in the future and allow for extensibility in terms of what email can support as a platform.

But I do understand if this sort of thing is outside of JMAP's intended scope.

On 25/01/2017 20:42, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
Why? What is the use case?

Arnt

_______________________________________________
Jmap mailing list
Jmap@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/jmap


--
Roderick Kennedy
---
Skype: roderick.kennedy
twitter: rvkennedy
LinkedIn: rvkennedy
Simul
trueSKY
--------------9E004907754DD7E78FFCCABF-- From nobody Wed Jan 25 17:26:48 2017 Return-Path: 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 0600B12942F for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:26:47 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.719 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.719 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=fastmail.com header.b=ev6etAUg; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=Bju92y9S 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 rPacR6bYXwE8 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:26:46 -0800 (PST) Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE2D8126D74 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:26:45 -0800 (PST) Received: from compute1.internal (compute1.nyi.internal [10.202.2.41]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 57A9F2068A for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:26:45 -0500 (EST) Received: from betaweb1 ([10.202.2.10]) by compute1.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:26:45 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=fastmail.com; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=mesmtp; bh=Twrr8W+mMz1u08sLcLOHTk/MYL s=; b=ev6etAUgkfW4+YcOy4Spxc6P080lzKbU1p5/4W/iDL/6K/uC1JH3nHWNMM TFMUqGGmSnj/FvzVPoy/80q0gRc9rYSR1AUrMGl/YEp7bqMijiv6wFzaKyQVmgif v/eZr7axYJktJjAFGjGtgViojGilX4FVwUd3EPt6Lj3sVs5ng= DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=Tw rr8W+mMz1u08sLcLOHTk/MYLs=; b=Bju92y9STg2sOSKiu/gTe/HecXTYD6yZCu qJAAfkEn2ik2HTXfldZiYYo9BQ2NdIz345ZdnfPYhEuFFNxHXhm3cesd6ChLYPRz o17Z+y/vkchDkvy+uyI4BM0/rQIgbfOitQnN1+BAMoCFqz8NemnshGAc1Msee8K2 bhywSEkqY= X-ME-Sender: Received: by mailuser.nyi.internal (Postfix, from userid 99) id 18F7EE2494; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 20:26:45 -0500 (EST) Message-Id: <1485394005.3364685.859833048.7918E8B3@webmail.messagingengine.com> From: Neil Jenkins To: jmap@ietf.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_----------=_148539400533646852" X-Mailer: MessagingEngine.com Webmail Interface - ajax-bcf47e6d In-Reply-To: <4ab1e46b-6c3e-c9b9-0c41-c103515d62a9@simul.co.uk> Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 12:26:45 +1100 References: <48b08ee6-d7e1-386f-81b6-908a957878f9@simul.co.uk> <4ab1e46b-6c3e-c9b9-0c41-c103515d62a9@simul.co.uk> Archived-At: Subject: Re: [Jmap] MIME vs message+attachment X-BeenThere: jmap@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: JSON Message Access Protocol List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:26:47 -0000 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --_----------=_148539400533646852 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" On Thu, 26 Jan 2017, at 08:11 AM, Roderick Kennedy wrote: > ICS invitations are one example - some clients treat them as > attachments, others handle them in their own right to connect to > calendaring apps. ICS files would appear as "attachments" in the current JMAP message model. However, there is certainly benefit to the client if the server can parse the iCalendar and make the data more easily accessible. The way to do this would be with an extra property on the Message object giving the parsed representation (e.g."attachedEvents"), just like the "attachedMessages" property gives a parsed representation of an attached email (which also appears in the "attachments" list). I omitted this from the initial draft, as I'm waiting on the CalConnect work to finish standardising a JSON event format so this can be used. Neil. --_----------=_148539400533646852 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/html; charset="utf-8"
On Thu, 26 Jan 2017, at 08:11 AM, Roderick Kennedy wrote:
ICS invitations are one example - some clients treat them as attachments, others handle them in their own right to connect to calendaring apps.

ICS files would appear as "attachments" in the current JMAP message model. However, there is certainly benefit to the client if the server can parse the iCalendar and make the data more easily accessible. The way to do this would be with an extra property on the Message object giving the parsed representation (e.g."attachedEvents"), just like the "attachedMessages" property gives a parsed representation of an attached email (which also appears in the "attachments" list). I omitted this from the initial draft, as I'm waiting on the CalConnect work to finish standardising a JSON event format so this can be used.

Neil.
--_----------=_148539400533646852--