Hi Adrien,
--On February 13, 2012 10:56:49 AM +1300 Adrien de Croy <[email protected]>
wrote:
So, in my opinion, whilst push notifications should be a requirement
for imap5, we should not define that protocol and instead push the
IETF to provide such a protocol for general use.
I don't think that's a workable approach.
Getting such a protocol together, which enables notifications from any
other application protocol I think will take a very long time, if it can
even succeed. It's hard enough getting consensus within one protocol
working group, let alone all of them working together.
Also every different protocol has different notification requirements.
trying to cover all that in a single protocol I think would be difficult.
I disagree because what I envisage for the generic notification service is
an OS-level api (supplied by OS or 3rd party libraries) that implement the
"internet push service protocol". What that means is that client developers
only have to implement a simple api to get push notifications. What is more
anyone implementing more than one protocol in their client (e.g. IMAP,
CalDAV and CardDAV) would only have to implement that once, albeit with
some minor differences in regard to how to get protocol specific pieces for
registering for notifications.
Your point about actually getting this done is valid. But realistically, do
you really think IMAP5 is going to deploy overnight? Frankly, anyone who
has a reasonably solid IMAP4 implementation today is going to question the
need to work on something new, particularly if that something new brings
nothing to the table (and simply fixing interop problems will probably not
be seen as something "new"). If you can actually show that IMAP5 adds
significant value by doing things like helping centralize push
notifications, simplifying submission etc, then maybe, just maybe, those
existing implementors might actually consider throwing out their current
investment in IMAP4 for the new thing. But, IMHO, you are really going to
have to up-sell IMAP5 to get buy-in from the major email providers. Now
that does not mean it is not worth doing, but it does mean having to do
more than just fixing perceived or real deficiencies.
--
Cyrus Daboo
_______________________________________________
imap5 mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/imap5
