MBOX-Line: From alexey.melnikov at isode.com  Wed Mar 19 16:30:23 2014
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Date: Fri Jun  8 12:34:52 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] STARTTLS after PREAUTH
In-Reply-To: <20140319125919.Horde.lPfMlZ_d7yz2EYxcLrkFeQ3@bigworm.curecanti.org>
References: <20140318141305.Horde.iyy0UP8Ostx9TojRZiFyjw1@bigworm.curecanti.org>
	<059bac1f-35eb-4f87-bd5e-e986dfb46b83@flaska.net>
	<20140318152549.Horde.0C2tXb4vwx_29xt0ZbwdEQ4@bigworm.curecanti.org>
	<1395187453.9897.96141249.7BE88CD8@webmail.messagingengine.com>
	<alpine.LSU.2.00.1403191002520.31260@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
	<20140319125919.Horde.lPfMlZ_d7yz2EYxcLrkFeQ3@bigworm.curecanti.org>
Message-ID: <72EE9E09-248C-4AE1-A80F-CD1A6A74B601@isode.com>

Hi Michael,

> On 19 Mar 2014, at 18:59, Michael M Slusarz <slusarz@curecanti.org> wrote:
> 
> Quoting Tony Finch <dot@dotat.at>:
> 
>> Bron Gondwana <brong@fastmail.fm> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 19, 2014, at 08:25 AM, Michael M Slusarz wrote:
>>> >
>>> > STARTTLS deprecated the use of port 993, which isn't an official IMAP
>>> > port FWIW.
>> 
>> What do you mean by "official"? Have you seen RFC 6186?
> 
> Nothing in there registering 993 to IMAP.  RFC 6335 registry agrees that it hasn't been "officially" reserved:
> 
> http://www.iana.org/assignments/service-names-port-numbers/service-names-port-numbers.xhtml?search=imaps
> 
> But this is just arguing semantics.  Real-world: 993 (& 995) have universal knowledge as to their current use.

I think IETF UTA WG is going to register them properly.

> michael
> A
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Imap-protocol mailing list
> Imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
> http://mailman13.u.washington.edu/mailman/listinfo/imap-protocol

