On 9/27/2019 3:37 PM, David MacQuigg wrote:
First, citing Browser as an alternative to Client is a misunderstanding
of the role of a browser in email. I understand the tendency to claim
that 'web mail' is somehow distinct, but really it isn't. It is merely
a particular approach to the implementation of an MUA, splitting its
functionality between a server and code /inside/ the browser.
Good observation. I'm not clear how to clarify the diagram, however.
What it is intended to show is that the Recipient can retrieve his email
either through a browser or through some other client software, and the
The browser is merely one of those 'other' client software. the diagram
gives it special status. it's fine to want to show alternatives, but
they should be equal.
protocols communicating with the MDA are different.
Second is citing client and browser as connecting to the MDA, rather
than the mailstore, which is what they really interact with. They do
this without the involvement of the MDA.
I view the Mailstore as part of the MDA,
It isn't.
I suspect the confusion here is the common one of conflating network
architecture design with implementation design. They are quite different.
whether it is actually disks
inside the MDA, or somewhere out in the cloud. Maybe leaving out the
label "Mailstore" will make the diagram more clear.
It won't.
Can you create a diagram equivalent to Fig. 1, using only the entities
and terminology in RFC 5598?
No doubt one could.
d/
--
Dave Crocker
Brandenburg InternetWorking
bbiw.net
_______________________________________________
ietf-smtp mailing list
ietf-smtp(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-smtp