Hellow Jeff, Jeffrey Walton <noloa...@gmail.com> writes:
> On Thu, Apr 3, 2025 at 11:23 PM Max Nikulin <maniku...@gmail.com> wrote: >> [...] >> Let's avoid discussions if gmail should be used. De-facto it is widely >> used, it has features and limitations. My point is that gmail users >> should be aware that some suggestions perfectly valid for other MUA >> should be avoided in the mail.google.com web application. > > I've avoided this argument since it seems like a fallacious argument > for gratuitous subject changes, but it may explain the use of Gmail > and friends... > > One thing to remember about big tech email services, like Gmail, > Hotmail and Yahoo Mail: The companies are driving modern web and > internet security standards. If you want multifactor authentication > (MFA) on your email account, then you will likely need to use one from > big tech. The big tech companies incorporate FIDO, FIDO2 and WebAuthn > protocols. (There are some 3rd party email services also providing > MFA, but it is not standardized and the smaller companies are the > exception, not the rule). > > Sadly, the IETF has not managed to provide an email standard that > includes MFA taken workflows. The IETF's email standards are still > just password based. The IETF has been asleep at the wheel. > > There are some awful looking proposals on occasion. The proposals are > awful looking (to me) because they do things like add email+http > instead of adding new email verbs to just the existing email RFCs like > RFC 5321 (SMTP), RFC 3501 (IMAP) and RFC 1939 (POP). > > If anyone is interested in following the IETF's progress (or lack > thereof), join the IETF's mailmaint mailing list. See > <https://datatracker.ietf.org/group/mailmaint/about/>. I've been interested in email standards for a long time. Thank you so much for the IETF link. > Jeff Sincerely, Byunghee
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
