[imp] imp 2.3.x vs TWIG

[rob@myinternetplace.net]

Quoting Jeff Greenfield <jgreen@calvin.edu>:

>> The design problem I ran into: how to authenticate for the remote
>> servers, if the two IMAP servers have different passwords?  My only
>> idea was to ask the user to separate the password entered into the
>> proxy with a predefined key, so that they could be sent to the
>> separate servers. (e.g. if I had two passwords 'dude' and 'sweet',
>> and a key '||', then my proxy password would be 'dude||sweet'.  Not
>> very elegant - other ideas welcome.

> If you are talking about allowing the user to add or delete multiple
> IMAP mailboxes themselves, this is the design I would approach:
> Assume for the IMP installation, there will always be 1 default IMAP
> server for each user (perhaps a dual key - Primary IMAP server /
> UserID) that they log into.  Then either next to their address book,
> or separate database - maintain a list of "remote mailboxes" that
> the user can specify - which actually contains the IMAP hostname,
> username, and password of that remote mailbox.  Thus the user only
> has to log into their "primary" mailbox, and gets all the rest of it
> (even if both their userid and password are different between the
> systems).  Of course, storing and passing a password to/from a
> database source might be too insecure for some, but I think that can
> be tightened enough to make this a feasible implementation.

I think that we are bumping into a design decision with IMP.  Are we
getting hung up on the "primary inbox" thing?  I think I remember
Chuck saying that there would be a "horde login" at some point.  That,
of course, would be the "primary login", and then all of the email
passwords/server names would be stored in the database.

rob

-------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through IMP: http://www.myinternetplace.net