Subject: [Jmap] Call for adoption of SMIME for JMAP - reply by April 15

From: "Bron Gondwana" <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 08:24:33 -0400

Hi All,

I'm pretty sure we already decided to adopt Alexey's S/MIME work, but just in case and to tick all the boxes, please reply here if you have any objections to this working group adopting a draft on how to deal with S/MIME via JMAP, edited by Alexey.

Cheers,

Bron.

--
 Bron Gondwana, CEO, FastMail Pty Ltd
 [email-masked]

---

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 13:33:46 +0100

On Tuesday 26 March 2019 13:24:33 CET, Bron Gondwana wrote:
> I'm pretty sure we already decided to adopt Alexey's S/MIME 
> work, but just in case and to tick all the boxes, please reply 
> here if you have any objections to this working group adopting a 
> draft on how to deal with S/MIME via JMAP, edited by Alexey.

Some wit once quipped that S/MIME had more implementations than users. 
Can't remember who that was. But I do hope this will avoid adding even a 
single SHOULD or MUST to implementers who don't care about S/MIME.

Arnt

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:40:06 +0000

On 26/03/2019 12:33, Arnt Gulbrandsen wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure we already decided to adopt Alexey's S/MIME work, but
>> just in case and to tick all the boxes, please reply here if you have
>> any objections to this working group adopting a draft on how to deal
>> with S/MIME via JMAP, edited by Alexey.
> 

This would be a JMAP extension optional to implement. So I think this is
given.

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 12:44:33 +0000

> with S/MIME via JMAP, edited by Alexey.

To clarify, there might be 2 possible work items here (in one or two
documents): S/MIME signature verification status indicator (relatively
easy) and S/MIME signing/encryption by JMAP server that manages keys on
user's behalf. I am happy to work on both or just the first one in the WG.

---

From: Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 13:48:09 +0100

> This would be a JMAP extension optional to implement. So I think this is

As I understand it, you're saying that if an incoming S/MINE message is 
read by an S/MIME-ignorant JMAP client, then no part of the server's output 
for that message depends on whether the server implements this extension. 
Right? Then good.

Arnt

---

From: Alexey Melnikov <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2019 13:57:21 +0100

> On 26 Mar 2019, at 13:48, Arnt Gulbrandsen <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> As I understand it, you're saying that if an incoming S/MINE message is read by an S/MIME-ignorant JMAP client, then no part of the server's output for that message depends on whether the server implements this extension. Right? Then good.

Client will need to indicate that it wants this information.