Robert Banz wrote:
> An extension or protocol enhancement is only good as the client
> implementations are -- and we know how successful that's been for
> other optional capabilities -- such as ACL management.
Almost nobody cares about ACLs, so almost nobody implements it (sad, but
true). I w
An extension or protocol enhancement is only good as the client
implementations are -- and we know how successful that's been for
other optional capabilities -- such as ACL management.
On Jan 14, 2010, at 9:42 AM, kael wrote:
> On 01/06/2010 08:47 AM, Rob Banz wrote:
>> I would argue that it
On 01/06/2010 08:47 AM, Rob Banz wrote:
> I would argue that it's out of scope -- credential management should
> be taken care of by your credential management system, be it through a
> web interface or whatever. Even if it were to be an accepted spec, the
> chances of all of the client-write
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 13:50 -0500, Adam Tauno Williams wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 20:35 +0530, ram wrote:
> > On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 23:47 -0800, Rob Banz wrote:
> > > I would argue that it's out of scope -- credential management should
> > > be taken care of by your credential management sy
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 20:35 +0530, ram wrote:
> On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 23:47 -0800, Rob Banz wrote:
> > I would argue that it's out of scope -- credential management should
> > be taken care of by your credential management system, be it through a
> > web interface or whatever. Even if it were
On Wed, 2010-01-06 at 13:08 -0500, Dale Ghent wrote:
> On Jan 6, 2010, at 10:05 AM, ram wrote:
>
> > Everyone need not implement it.
> > If the protocol is available , I definitely know thunderbird will
> have at least one extension within 2 days :-)
> As Rob put it, user credential management
On Jan 6, 2010, at 10:05 AM, ram wrote:
> Everyone need not implement it.
> If the protocol is available , I definitely know thunderbird will have at
> least one extension within 2 days :-)
That's great for Thunderbird, but how about all of the MUAs out there.
Password changes via email syst
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 23:47 -0800, Rob Banz wrote:
> I would argue that it's out of scope -- credential management should
> be taken care of by your credential management system, be it through a
> web interface or whatever. Even if it were to be an accepted spec, the
> chances of all of the
On Tue, 2010-01-05 at 23:47 -0800, Rob Banz wrote:
> I would argue that it's out of scope -- credential management should
> be taken care of by your credential management system, be it through a
> web interface or whatever. Even if it were to be an accepted spec, the
> chances of all of the c
I would argue that it's out of scope -- credential management should
be taken care of by your credential management system, be it through a
web interface or whatever. Even if it were to be an accepted spec, the
chances of all of the client-writers implementing it, and in a
reasonable way,
Would it be practical to have common protocols like IMAP to support
enhanced features
For eg.
IMAP protocol may possibly support change password.
A IMAP server administrator may optionally configure a change-password
hook on the server which would change the password on whatever backend
he use
11 matches
Mail list logo
