> [smtp] is what the world uses today and will continue to use for quite > some time. reports of its death are just a tad premature. > > When folks agree on the new mail transfer services that we need and > when we try to add them to smtp and fail, THEN we can have productive > discussions about a replacement transfer protocol.
well, except that that's not how dns was created, or http, or html, or nntp, or xml, or rpc/xdr/nfs, or sip, or pgp, or jabber. i guess that's how a lot of people now think it should be done, but the counterexamples are extensive, and so i'm not convinced that smtp will be replaced under precisely the conditions you describe. > until then, calls for a new protocol ... constitute firing before aiming. i guess we'll all see how it turns out. > And everyone else needs to move from the generic reference to > "consent" on to something that is more concrete, as well as being > integrated into a full range of human uses for email. i'm pretty comfortable with www.dictionary.com's definition of "consent".
