Re: Do we need IMAP/TLS or POP/TLS?

Chris,

Chris Newman wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 1 Jun 1997, Paul E. Hoffman wrote:
> > IMAP and POP clients, however, by definition have a pre-existing
> > relationship with the server. That is, the server must know about them
> > before they attach, and therefore this prior knowledge can be used in
> > setting up the client.
> 
> It's bad enough that clients need to be configured with the name of the
> IMAP/POP server itself.  Forcing users to also decide whether or not to
> connect to a TLS port when setting up a client is completely unacceptable
> in my book.

  I agree.  But it seems that that is the direction of the WG at this
point.
But there are always work arounds.  Our MLPI is a good example.  :)
> 
> > The only exception I can think of is public, anonymous IMAP mailboxes. In
> > this case, however, you wouldn't be using TLS, since there is no
> > authentication and no need for privacy.
> 
> I disagree.  I might very well want to prevent observers from seeing what
> I fetch from an anonymous IMAP server.

  Yep, that is a definate possibility.
> 
> ---
> Chris Newman <[email protected]>
> 
> A paragraph from ASN.1 standard: "The resulting type and value of an
> instance of use of the new value notation is determined by the value
> (and the type of the value) finally assigned to the distinguished
> local value reference identified by the keyword VALUE, according to
> the processing of the macrodefinition for the new type notation
> followed by that for the new value notation."

  You got it!  Thanks for speaking up.  I thought I was th only one
on this limb.  :)

Regards

-- 
Jeffrey A. Williams
DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java Development Eng.
Information Eng. Group. IEG. INC. 
Phone :913-294-2375 (v-office)
E-Mail [email protected]