#imap4 — Public Fediverse posts

@Creatortray Thanks! I'm so glad I hung on to my original Atari 800. It was my first computer. I had no idea how iconic it would become.

With #SpartaDOSX, an INCOGNITO board and a #FujiNet, it starts to become a practical machine, for #TextEditing at least. I'd love to know if there's an 8-bit #IMAP4 #SMTP client. I guess modern cryptographic protocols would make it unusable. I haven't looked into to what degree that can be handed off to the FujiNet.

Please help me find a #console or #terminal email application that supports #imap4 and #carddav and works on a small screen. It would be great if it's an #emacs application or works with #emacsclient.

I'm looking for this in anticipation of #sharpikeebo.

@crozilla,

In a nutshell, imagine #GMAIL (a broadly used hosted #Email app) without support for #IMAP4 or #POP3. That's what @Mastodon is right now, in regards to #ActivityPub and the #Fediverse.

@crozilla,

The thing about #Email is that you have clients supporting client-server protocols (#IMAP4 and #POP3) and servers supporting a server-server protocol (#SMTP), so the loose-coupling is built-in and functional thereby negating the need for protocol emphasis.

The problem with @Mastodon is that it only supports the server-server aspect of #ActivityPub which has created a suboptimal situation where a majority of #Fediverse clients are written specifically for it.

@codesmith @[email protected] @Mastodon @atomicpoet Fundamentally, this is about documents (#ActivityStreams) and orchestrated routing (via #ActivityPub) across outboxes and inboxes, on a per account basis.

I am sure #GMAIL's #API offers more than #IMAP4 regarding inbox and outbox interactions, but that doesn't stop it supporting an open standard for loosely-coupled client-server interactions.

@codesmith @steve @Mastodon @atomicpoet Now imagine #GMAIL without its support for #IMAP4 and/or #POP3? You would have a concentration of #email clients hardwired to GMAIL.

Mastodon needs to emulate GMAIL in this case, re product architecture and open standards support 😀

@codesmith @steve @Mastodon @atomicpoet The best way to look at this matter is through the lenses of #email since it is also based on inboxes (comprising mbox docs), outboxes (comprising mbox docs), server-server protocol (#SMTP), and client-server protocols (#IMAP4 or #POP3).

#GMAIL, a hosted service just like #Mastodon, offers the following:

[1] Its own #API -- just like Mastodon
[2] SMTP support for server-server communications -- ditto
[3] IMAP4 or POP3 for client-server communications

@tarkowski ,

Think about the #Fediverse as you would #Email, where @Mastodon is in the role of #GMAIL which has its own #API — but without support for #IMAP4 (the client-server protocol).

IMAP4 enables loose-coupling of email clients and servers (managing inboxes and outboxes).

@bhaugen @evan @mike Imagine if #GMAIL only offered an #API without support for #IMAP4. The tradeoffs would be quite negative i.e., no additional experimentation required.

Every modern #email app supports #IMAP4 for interacting with inboxes and outboxes managed by a mail server.

Email is a generic function. Sociality via a #Fediverse should be similar. All that's required is support for the client-server aspect of the existing #ActivityPub spec 😀

@evan @Mastodon @mike Yes, that's fine too. Developers can work with #API abstractions for specific programming languages or directly at the #HTTP protocol level -- just like in the world of #email as demonstrated by #GMAIL (courtesy of its support for #IMAP4)

@evan,

Good thing that's come out of this conversation is the emergence of a comparative stack for those unfamiliar the general pattern for interacting with inboxes and outboxes unleashed via #email.

#GMAIL is the hosted equivalent of @Mastodon.

#SMTP is the server-server protocol for delivering #mbox docs to inboxes and outboxes.

#IMAP4 is the client-server protocol (implemented by GMAIL but missing from Mastodon).

#ActivityStreams is the mbox payload equivalent.

/cc @Mastodon @mike

@evan,

I didn't say or insinuate that. I was simply expressing concern about the server-server centricity of @Mastodon in relation to its #ActivityPub support.

Simplest example is #Email where #SMTP plays the role of #ActivityPub re moving #mbox docs across outboxes and inboxes; with #IMAP4 (a client-server protocol) handling retrieval.

Even #GMAIL supports #IMAP4 (and #POP3) while also having its own #API.

@Mastodon should operate in similar fashion is my point 😀

/cc @mike

@evan,

Again, how is it that you don't glean the quest for a client-server implementation of the #ActivityPub protocol from my comments?

The server-server implementation by @Mastodon only addresses part of the problem re loose-coupling of clients and servers across the #Fediverse.

BTW -- This situation is very similar to #Email where even hosted services like #GMAIL support #IMAP4 and #POP3 rather than just #SMTP .

I hope my position is clearer now?

/cc @mike

@bobwyman @davew Generally, developers aren't immediately concerned about, entity relationships and entity relationship type semantics. Hence the issue of not recognizing conceptual common ground during the early stages of solution development -- or tweaking retrospectively.

In addition, there are situations where protocols are the delineation drivers e.g., #SMTP, #IMAP4, and #POP when looking at #UI/#UX layering over in- and out-boxes 😀

@atomicpoet ,

Yes, with support for #IMAP4 i.e., offering a #Fediverse bridge for inboxes 😀

/cc @protonmail

#ODSMail

@vegos_f05 @digitalcourage @Tealk @aliceice

Stimmt, denn selbst bei PGP-verschlüsselten E-Mails sind die im Header enthaltenen Metadaten meist unverschlüsselt. Und bekanntlich sagte der ehemalige CIA-Director Michael Hayden: “We Kill People Based on Metadata”.

Vielleicht sollten wir das in diesen Artikel einbauen: https://digitalcourage.de/digitale-selbstverteidigung/vertrauenswuerdige-e-mail-anbieter

Andererseits schalten viele Anbieter POP (#POP3) ab, weil dieses Protokoll kaum noch genutzt wird. Ich bin auch nicht sicher, ob Sicherheitsforschende es so gut im Blick haben wie #IMAP (#IMAP4). Ich glaube, man kann auch via IMAP seine E-Mails runterladen und dann auf dem Server löschen. Das ist nur sehr unüblich.

Is Mastodon #decentralised? From one side, the Mastodon #network is decentralised.

But from other side, is #Mastodon server software #development decentralised?

Example, if someone wants to have an #email server, there is a #choice of #POP3 / #IMAP4 server software (#Dovecot, #Cyrus, #Courier etc, also #IMAP-less #POP-only #server software exist) and #SMTP server #software (#Postfix, #Exim, Courier etc).

But if they want Mastodon server, there is only one server software item, and no choice.