Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

unencumberedbyfacts.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 235 posts

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#121

Post by inanutshellus »

bad_user wrote: post #40

FastMail is behind this protocol and from what I've read JMAP has evolved out of their web interface. I've been a happy customer, even though lately I flirted with going back to GSuite for my personal email, but after a trial realized that Gmail does many things well, except for being a good email service. So I went back to FastMail and renewed for another 2 years. Seeing this new protocol is exciting, because JMAP i…

I considered FM a while back but... you pay per account! $50/account no less! I separate my email into three accounts across two domains and my wife does the same and I have kids who'll have their own email addresses at some point.

I can't even begin to consider using it at the price point I presume I'd be in.

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#122

Post by bad_user »

eggsampler wrote: post #110
bad_user wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SPF/DKIM are designed to prevent spam and not to prevent spoofing of From. There is a difference. SPF has nothing to do with the From header. And the DKIM signature does not have to match the sender’s domain, the signature can be that of any domain. This means that for practical purposes, anybody can send spoofed emails. That an email is signed with DKIM, that doesn’t mean much and it is meant to build a web of trust…

Sure, I get that. I get there is a whole weird and wacky world of email use that is considered legitimate and needs to work that way for a myriad of reasons. I don't get why their MTA cannot at least have an option to reject mail from your domains if it's not being sent using your account credentials. The average layperson will not get that. I'm fairly sure if my mother received an email that wasn't delivered to a th…

But that’s the point, you can send a spoofed email to your mother that will not go into her spam folder, even if she uses Gmail.

The only way Google could protect you is if the From address is from @gmail.com (maybe, not completely sure). But if you have your own domain, you can’t have that protection. Sure, you might not be able to use Google’s own servers to send that email, but email is federated so you can use somebody else’s servers.

The only thing that stops spammers from doing more of this is the web of trust happening between email services. This is precisely why if you setup your own server, you’ll start off with a negative reputation and your emails will end up tagged as spam depending on the destination.

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#123

Post by rswail »

u801e wrote: post #112
xorcist wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not entirely clear to me what they could do about it. Since they are an email provider, they probably don't have control over the networks their customers send email from, and what else their customers do with their domains. Someone could decide to forward their other mail to their fastmail account. Should they then potentially risk email their other customers send to that address? DMARC headers tries to solve t…

They could configure their MTA to rewrite the From: header so that the value matches the authenticated user and that the sender users the Reply-To: header to redirect replies instead.

They need to provide the ability to use SMTP servers other than their own for @fastmail.com users.

SPF, DKIM and DMARC do not provide authentication of non-envelope headers like From: and To: etc, unless they are specifically included, but there is no way to publish that you require those headers as part of the DKIM signature.

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#124

Post by shittyadmin »

So, you say that it doesn't maintain a persistent connection, but that poses a problem - it needs a way to do push notifications still I assume? Those need an open socket somewhere - does JMAP allow for it or does it make you rely on a 3rd party?

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#125

Post by chrisfinazzo »

josteink wrote: post #80
abtinf wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...Gmail does many things well, except for being a good email service. Gmail/Gsuite seem to be good email services from my perspective as lay user and occasional admin. Can you expand on why you think they are not good email services?

Here's a few things: - constantly changing things around. UI gets less intuitive for every release. - slower for every release - violates IMAP standard by re-using IDs across tags/IMAP folders, risking actual data loss. Example: if you in a real email-client try to delete a email from a single folder, you will also delete this email from all other folders it has been "tagged" in. - similar IMAP issues with sent email…

The messed up deletion behavior baffles me to this day. The stock mail app on iOS will behave correctly if you muck with the Gmail POP/IMAP settings and turn off 'Archive' in MobileMail, but I have zero confidence that this will work on macOS because Apple pays less attention to the desktop and Gmail don't give a crap if actual client applications work correctly.

They just assume everyone uses the web interface.

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#126

Post by aroch »

inanutshellus wrote: post #121
bad_user wrote: post #40

FastMail is behind this protocol and from what I've read JMAP has evolved out of their web interface. I've been a happy customer, even though lately I flirted with going back to GSuite for my personal email, but after a trial realized that Gmail does many things well, except for being a good email service. So I went back to FastMail and renewed for another 2 years. Seeing this new protocol is exciting, because JMAP i…

I considered FM a while back but... you pay per account! $50/account no less! I separate my email into three accounts across two domains and my wife does the same and I have kids who'll have their own email addresses at some point. I can't even begin to consider using it at the price point I presume I'd be in.

You can have all the domains under one fastmail account per user (I have ~8 domains, and ~20 users). But yes, you still have to pay for each person

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#127

Post by PaulHoule »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #3

I really want to see some innovation in the email space. The landscape is like a sea of false promises and dashed dreams. SMTP is one of the bread-and-butters of the internet, yet it just doesn't seem to be moving forward (maybe that's for the best), and no one's building extensions on top of it. Maybe I'm naive in thinking it was possible but we could have avoided this whole "make an account on X messenger so we can…

Email is "good enough".

The real hole is "instant messaging". Somehow every few years we got from ICQ to AIM to Paltalk to Skype to Facebook Messenger to Slack to ... (at least Altassian had the decency to take HipChat behind the woodshed and shoot it)

The strange thing is that these services dry up, blow away, get replaced, but they don't seem to improve on what came before.

There is a standard, XMPP, but the only people who care about it are firefighters, cops, and soldiers. For all the anger at internet giants these days, I can't see for the life of me why people aren't pushing for open instant messenging.

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#128

Post by bad_user »

y4mi wrote: post #102
mehrdadn wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Holy cow, I will have to look into this. Thanks a ton!!

filters cannot be applied retroactively, however. be sure to write your filters before receiving anything. Especially important if you're importing your email for the first time... and insanely annoying if you want to debug such an advanced filter. as always with fastmail: It has great features... but always with a massive caveat.

Most of my filters are simple searches. And if you can search, you can apply it retroactively.

Also FastMail’s search works for any email header so it can be more potent than that of Gmail.

I wonder why can’t they add a checkbox to apply the rules retroactively. Seems to be simple enough.

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#129

Post by PaulHoule »

sjwright wrote: post #58
vidarh wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not just the UI side. The underlying protocol was also pointlessly over-engineered. SMTP is still around because it is simple . You can get a basic SMTP client running in an hour or two. You can get a basic server running in a similar amount of time, at least in a higher level language. That matters, not because anyone will have anything usable in that time, but because it lets you start to experiment very, very easi…

The S in SMTP literally stands for Simple. And it was developed in 1982. So it was considered simple in 1982. That gives you some idea how simple it is. https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc821

It is simple today, except for the authentication.

Of course, if the authentication doesn't work, nothing works!

Re: JMAP: Like IMAP but Not Really

#130

Post by bad_user »

inanutshellus wrote: post #121
bad_user wrote: post #40

FastMail is behind this protocol and from what I've read JMAP has evolved out of their web interface. I've been a happy customer, even though lately I flirted with going back to GSuite for my personal email, but after a trial realized that Gmail does many things well, except for being a good email service. So I went back to FastMail and renewed for another 2 years. Seeing this new protocol is exciting, because JMAP i…

I considered FM a while back but... you pay per account! $50/account no less! I separate my email into three accounts across two domains and my wife does the same and I have kids who'll have their own email addresses at some point. I can't even begin to consider using it at the price point I presume I'd be in.

I use a single account for 5 domains, with multiple aliases per domain.

For IMAP folders you can set a default identity and email in a folder stays in that folder without cluttering Archive, like in Gmail. So in effect you can do much with a single account.

Post reply on HN