Re: [Imap-protocol] Seeking clarity on Gmail "Access for less secure apps" setting for non XOAuth2 access
Ángel González <[email protected]> Wed, 03 Sep 2014 22:02:32 +0200
| Newsgroups | gmane.mail.imap.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
El mar, 02-09-2014 a las 14:09 -0700, Brandon Long escribió: > > > On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 2:02 PM, Arnt Gulbrandsen: > The point of 5530 and that registry was that clients should > not need to do such things. IMO Google screws up by not > defininig response codes, not you. > > > Extending the available codes via RFC seems heavy weight, especially > if its for things that are more specific to our server. Maybe a list > of "generic but more specific" ones could be made, but would we really > have one for "Your domain administrator has disabled IMAP for your > domain from this IP"? Instead of a RFC listing each error, that's more suited for creating a registry of error codes. Although the idea of using a wiki seems better than placing it at IANA. > > As for the WEBALERT case, its expected that the correct thing to do is > to send the user to the url specified, but it has to be the user, > they're likely to have to authenticate the session. > > > Half of the above would be UNAVAILABLE or maybe CONTACTADMIN, some > would be LIMIT/OVERQUOTA... but its unclear how much "clearer" these > would be if they're translated to the user's language via a "generic" > category. > > > We have debated having a per-message unique identifier, also useful > when people contact us about which error they're seeing, but haven't > exposed it. I'd say we could translate these with our upcoming > support for UTF8, I'm not too keen about providing translated messages unrequested. > but these are almost assuredly seen prior to any ENABLE that would > help. Specially given that you can only use ENABLE in the authenticated state. <random ideas> It may be worth taking into account SMAP 'LANG' capability announcing if creating an extension for handling that. A extension for supporting translated messages might be: The server exposes the capability by announcing a series of LANG=<langtag> tokens on its CAPABILITY. <langtag> is a language tag as defined by RFC 1766. Providing just LANG means the server supports some translations but is not providing the full list. The client requests internationalization of the messages with <tag> LANG <langcode>. An untagged response is provided with the actual language chosen by the server (eg. the user requested EN-COCKNEY but the server provided EN-GB) '<tag> LANG ?' could be used for requesting a list of languages supported by the server. And '<tag> LANG' for declaring support for the extension but stating no preference. The server may choose a language based on an account setting, a default for its domain, ip geolocation, etc. Note that the server may decide to send an untagged LANG after login. 1- http://www.courier-mta.org/cone/smap1.html _______________________________________________ Imap-protocol mailing list [email protected] http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol