[Top] [All Lists]

RE: Comments about draft-martin-managesieve-00.txt

2000-02-17 21:05:04
-- On Tuesday, February 15, 2000 9:36 AM -0800 the entity known as Randall Gellens <randy(_at_)Qualcomm(_dot_)Com> wrote:

<begin quote>

At 9:37 AM +0000 2/15/00, Edward Hibbert wrote:

ACAP looks as though it's re-inventing another directory service
and access protocol

This perception is not uncommon, but the intent of ACAP is not to be a
directory access protocol at all, but rather a very easy way for clients
to access data on a central server that is normally kept on the local
hard drive.  Client configuration and preference data, for the most part.

<end quote>

To which Matthew Wall offers this response on Thu, 17 Feb 2000 23:02:07 -0500:

I would add somewhat parenthetically is that some kinds of data -- things like user email addresses, for example -- tends to be identical but be treated in different ways depending on the context of management and user access. Directory data, for instance, is a bit different from the way you want your personal addressbooks to be handled: the example I usually give is you probably want your Aunt Millie's address in your personal addressbook and maybe shareable with your wife, but not in the corporate directory.

Sieve filter strings I expect will have similar provenance -- on the one hand, there will be times when they may best be stored as part of a directory, others where they're appropriate to client preference data.

Speaking from the client side of things, from a client that may wish to use sieve strings in a disconnected mode (e.g. with no LDAP server available), but where some communication with a remote server is nice for resynching from time to time, the ACAP model works a lot better. The email client program treats a user-based and defined filter as yet another preference, in effect. LDAP can be miserable if you try to overload it with too much of this stuff.

I do agree that ACAP would be the best management route in the best of all possible worlds, but don't really see a problem using LDAP or whatever works in a given environment if the deployment warrants it...we've even experimented with IMSP 8-).

- mw

PS Larry's comments are well-taken, however, about implementation humps.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>