wasm-demo/demo/ermis-f/imap-protocol/cur/1600095044.22641.mbox:2,S

36 lines
1.3 KiB
Plaintext

MBOX-Line: From slusarz at curecanti.org Wed Mar 19 11:59:19 2014
To: imap-protocol@u.washington.edu
From: Michael M Slusarz <slusarz@curecanti.org>
Date: Fri Jun 8 12:34:52 2018
Subject: [Imap-protocol] STARTTLS after PREAUTH
In-Reply-To: <alpine.LSU.2.00.1403191002520.31260@hermes-1.csi.cam.ac.uk>
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>
Message-ID: <20140319125919.Horde.lPfMlZ_d7yz2EYxcLrkFeQ3@bigworm.curecanti.org>
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.
michael
A