nanog mailing list archives
Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...
From: Bjørn Mork <bjorn () mork no>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2019 09:19:41 +0100
Miles Fidelman <mfidelman () meetinghouse net> writes:
Ever since the net went commercial, we've been seeing more and more walled gardens - driven by folks with an economic advantage to segmenting & capturing audiences. Whenever someone talks about how great some new technology is, I'm always reminded to "follow the money." (And ain't it ironic that Microsoft supports calendaring protocols, while Google breaks them.)
And this is happening to email too. It's not IM or online conferencing that will kill email, but fragmentation into multiple closed email environments. We accept SPF and DMARC, abusing DNS to deliberately break SMTP. All in the name of spam protection, Mailing lists barely work anymore and have to resort to hacks to be able to forward messages to their recipients. Traditional forwarding to another account hasn't worked in years. Smaller providers are regularily blocked causing service disruption to their users. It's just a matter of time before the big players, well known for their disregard of open protocols, just shut off SMTP completely. They'll probably "invent" something much better as an excuse... And the masses will love them for that, because it finally removed the spam "problem". And everyone has a gmail account anyway, so why bother with outside email? Bjørn
Current thread:
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request], (continued)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Cummings, Chris (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Jason Hellenthal via NANOG (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Jason Hellenthal via NANOG (Jan 12)
- Enough port 26 talk... Richard (Jan 12)
- Re: Enough port 26 talk... Bjørn Mork (Jan 13)
- Re: Enough port 26 talk... John Levine (Jan 13)
- Message not available
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... John R. Levine (Jan 14)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Miles Fidelman (Jan 14)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Bjørn Mork (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Stephen Satchell (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Tei (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... James Downs (Jan 15)
- RE: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Keith Medcalf (Jan 15)
- Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk... Grant Taylor via NANOG (Jan 15)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] valdis . kletnieks (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Ross Tajvar (Jan 12)
- Re: yet another round of SMTP Over TLS on Port 26 - Implicit TLS Proposal [Feedback Request] Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan (Jan 12)