Keep JMAP mail objects in separate method families

Use this document to resolve one bounded operational decision: Keep JMAP mail objects in separate method families. Only the official source and traced locations below supply facts. Confirm applicability before acting.

Source fact:

The official RFC 8621 — The JSON Meta Application Protocol (JMAP) for Mail from RFC Editor / Internet Engineering Task Force supports the following bounded statements:

• A Mailbox is a named collection of Email objects, and moving an Email between Mailboxes does not change the Email object’s identifier. The research record locates this support at Section 2 (Mailboxes).
• An Email object represents one RFC 5322 message independently of the Mailbox and Thread objects that organize or group it. The research record locates this support at Section 4 (Emails).
• An EmailSubmission is a separate object that references an Email and an Identity and tracks envelope, release, cancellation, and per-recipient delivery status. The research record locates this support at Section 7 (Email Submission).

The source support ends with the statements listed above. Use them to examine sending domains, receiving domains, message agents, headers, authentication results, policy records, and failure handling in the applicable environment, not to imply a wider guarantee.

What the source does not establish

This RFC evidence supports only the named mail-protocol decision; it does not prove provider support, deliverability, or compliance for a particular flow. The citation is not a substitute for observed state, authorization, compliance evidence, or dependency health. Examine authoritative DNS, certificates, time, gateways, identity stores, reputation services, and third-party mail providers before translating the source into an operational decision.

Applicability questions

• For source statement 1 at Section 2 (Mailboxes), which observable configuration, record, or test can confirm applicability here?
• For source statement 2 at Section 4 (Emails), which observable configuration, record, or test can confirm applicability here?
• For source statement 3 at Section 7 (Email Submission), which observable configuration, record, or test can confirm applicability here?
• Within sending domains, receiving domains, message agents, headers, authentication results, policy records, and failure handling, which versions, roles, and configuration states define the review population?
• Could authoritative DNS, certificates, time, gateways, identity stores, reputation services, and third-party mail providers invalidate the test, hide a failure, or change applicability?
• Who owns the decision, and which observation requires stopping, escalation, or rollback?

DSE recommendation:

DSE recommends using the cited source as the evidence anchor for this decision. Make the source, asset scope, owner, and expected outcome explicit in the review record. Record the source location, examined part of sending domains, receiving domains, message agents, headers, authentication results, policy records, and failure handling, observed and expected states, owner, and reason for deviation.

Translate the conclusion into change control only after documenting dependencies, impact, test method, expected signals, failure signals, and restoration steps. Include authoritative DNS, certificates, time, gateways, identity stores, reputation services, and third-party mail providers, while excluding secrets and sensitive personal or topology data from ordinary tickets.

Verification and evidence

A reviewer should be able to retrace the decision from Section 2 (Mailboxes); Section 4 (Emails); Section 7 (Email Submission) through sanitized messages, DNS records, SMTP transcripts, authentication results, policy evaluation, and delivery or rejection logs. Record what was collected, where, when, by whom, and which system or role it represents.

Keep before-state evidence, approval, test or change result, exceptions, and after-state evidence together. Use an approved lab, window, or nonproduction path for risky tests. Set a recheck trigger for version, architecture, dependency, vendor, incident, or ownership change. A check proves only what was observed.

Official references

• RFC 8621 — The JSON Meta Application Protocol (JMAP) for Mail — RFC Editor / Internet Engineering Task Force