RE: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[Keith Medcalf]

On Tuesday, 15 January, 2019 12:10, James Downs  wrote:

>On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 06:46:07PM +0100, Tei wrote:

>> Is very hard to replace a open protocol,  wrapping may work if the
>> protocol is mostly abandoned (IRC) but thats not the case for
>> email.

> IRC is far from abandonded. There are lots of very active networks,
> 2 of which I use continously.
>
> But, it's been a week of non-NANOG talk, so

Plus there is IRC by web pages -- you know where all the Twit's hang out .. 
Twittering amongst themselves.

---
The fact that there's a Highway to Hell but only a Stairway to Heaven says a 
lot about anticipated traffic volume.

Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[Grant Taylor via NANOG]

On 01/15/2019 10:46 AM, Tei wrote:
I think the newsgroups died because was expensive for ISPs and filled 
with nasty stuff (warez and porn).


I believe newsgroups are still very much so alive and quite active.  I 
see 15k ~ 20k messages / 50 ~ 75 MB of /text/ newsgroups daily on my 
server.  My ~15 (I don't remember the exact number and can't be bothered 
to loo) peers will likely agree with me.


I see content on Usenet that is not available elsewhere.

There's also the binary news servers that are used to trade warz and 
pr0n and other untold things.



Gopher died because HTML was a improvement in every possible way.


I still see references to people using Gopher multiple times a year.


IRC still exist,


Yep.  I use it daily.


because it don't need to be hosted by a ISP.


I don't think an ISP is required to host any of the things being 
discussed in this email.



Forums still exist.


Yep.

Some of them even gateway into other communication mediums.


Mail list still exist (we are on one) Homesites where replaced by blogs.


Based on what I /personally/ see, mailing lists and usenet are roughly 
comparable.



Gmail?


Meh.

G Suite accounts are expensive.  I believe you have to pay by email 
address and get quite pricey.  "Free" alternatives have a place because 
can be cheaper than that.


Gmail have not added the "Foo has read your message" or "Foo is replying 
to your email". Two things that would be easy for them to do in Gmail 
to Gmail communication, and would be must-have features for a mail user. 
So maybe they don't aim to world domination?


I've said it before, and I'll say it again.  Email is not 
instant messaging.


Is very hard to replace a open protocol,  wrapping may work if the 
protocol is mostly abandoned (IRC) but thats not the case for email. 
I don't think email is going to be replaced soon.


There are people who say it yearly.  But I never believe them.



--
Grant. . . .
unix || die



smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature

Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[James Downs]

On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 06:46:07PM +0100, Tei wrote:

> Is very hard to replace a open protocol,  wrapping may work if the
> protocol is mostly abandoned (IRC) but thats not the case for email.

IRC is far from abandonded. There are lots of very active networks,
2 of which I use continously.

But, it's been a week of non-NANOG talk, so

Cheers,
-j

Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[Tei]

On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 at 09:21, Bjørn Mork  wrote:
..
> 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?

I think the newsgroups died because was expensive for ISPs and filled
with nasty stuff (warez and porn).
Gopher died because HTML was a improvement in every possible way.
IRC still exist, because it don't need to be hosted by a ISP.
Forums still exist.
Mail list still exist (we are on one)
Homesites where replaced by blogs.

Gmail?
G Suite accounts are expensive.  I believe you have to pay by email
address and get quite pricey.  "Free" alternatives have a place
because can be cheaper than that.

Gmail have not added the "Foo has read your message" or "Foo is
replying to your email". Two things that would be easy for them to do
in Gmail to Gmail communication, and would be must-have features for a
mail user.  So maybe they don't aim to world domination?

Is very hard to replace a open protocol,  wrapping may work if the
protocol is mostly abandoned (IRC) but thats not the case for email.
I don't think email is going to be replaced soon.

-- 
--
ℱin del ℳensaje.

Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[Stephen Satchell]

On 1/15/19 12:19 AM, Bjørn Mork wrote:
> And everyone has a gmail account anyway, so why bother with outside
> email?

Two words:  "search warrants."  I'm a US citizen, and I do NOT like the
idea of power-hungry people being able to paw through my mail.  Having
my own mail server, residing in my home, with medium security in place,
gives me peace of mind.

Even innocent people have things they want to hide from casual spying.
THOSE people don't have a need to know.  Period.

Not to mention that I can obey the rule common in Business 101 regarding
mail.  It goes like this:

QUESTION:  You are a medium-sized company.  How do you set up your mail
room to be efficient, and needing only a small staff?

ANSWER: You take out a number of post office boxes, and have each
department use its post office box to receive mail for that department.
 You task one person to stop at the post office to pick up the contents
of the post office box, properly banded.

In short, you let the postal system sort your mail for you.  They are
very good at it, and can even bring automation (that you can't afford)
to speed up the process.

For me, I have a mail server with several dozen inboxes
(Postfix/Dovecot).  Only a couple of those e-mail addresses have been
exposed to the world via mailing lists and USENET.  Thunderbird does a
nice job of presenting this gaggle of inboxes.  And I keep adding
mailboxes as the need arises.  I can see which inboxes has incoming
mail, and selectively look at each one as time permits.  Yes, I see all
the incoming spam that makes it through the DNSBLs, but I can ignore the
spam-catchers when I have better things to do.

Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[Bjørn Mork]

Miles Fidelman  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

Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[Miles Fidelman]

On 1/14/19 1:49 PM, John R. Levine wrote:

And you won't really have a choice because unless you're willing to go
full Ted Kaczynski one in a hundred of those emails will be very, very
important to you ...


Yeah.  E-mail remains the only scheme where the two parties don't have 
to be introduced first, don't have to be online at the same time, and 
you can check for it in one place (if you want to, or you can sort and 
file to your heart's content.)


I've stopped being surprised that enthusiasts who tell me that the IM 
or online conferencing silver bullet du jour will kill e-mail never 
understand this.



Tell me about it.

Originally, the Internet was built specifically to foster collaboration 
- open, interoperable protocols that work just fine across 
organizational boundaries.


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.)



--
In theory, there is no difference between theory and practice.
In practice, there is.   Yogi Berra

Re: the e-mail of the future is the e-mail oft the past, was Enough port 26 talk...

[John R. Levine]

And you won't really have a choice because unless you're willing to go
full Ted Kaczynski one in a hundred of those emails will be very, very
important to you ...


Yeah.  E-mail remains the only scheme where the two parties 
don't have to be introduced first, don't have to be online at the same 
time, and you can check for it in one place (if you want to, or you can 
sort and file to your heart's content.)


I've stopped being surprised that enthusiasts who tell me that the IM or 
online conferencing silver bullet du jour will kill e-mail never 
understand this.


R's,
John

Re: Enough port 26 talk...

[John Levine]

In article <871s5gpz1w@miraculix.mork.no> you write:
>Yes.  What is all the fuzz about?  Email will be as dead as USENET in a
>couple of years anyway.

Funny, people have been saying that pretty much every year since the
1990s.

What's different this time?

Re: Enough port 26 talk...

[Bjørn Mork]

Yes.  What is all the fuzz about?  Email will be as dead as USENET in a
couple of years anyway.

Welcome to the age of "feeds".  You may cry now.


Bjørn

Enough port 26 talk...

[Richard]

What Jason said in red.

On 1/12/19 6:07 PM, Jason Hellenthal via NANOG wrote:
> Honestly, you feel very highly of your work in which any of us do in
> this field but John has a very good point and constructive criticism
> shroud not be the down fall of anyone. Read it 100 times without
> taking any thought of your own work and try to see the whole picture.
>
> Not agreeing with John or you but it is very straight forward and
> industry leading. It’s polite. I would feel the proper response from
> you would be to acknowledge the feedback and ask for some correction
> and guidance as John has had a lot of involvement here as so many others. 
>
> He is not saying what you are doing is bad or such but more of
> guidance in a more proper direction so delusions are not set in the
> future.
>
> The whole picture of any outcome is not only had by just one person
> trying to make a difference but by the whole for a greater good for
> which makes sense for the current architectures and policies that are
> in place.
>
> I solute both you and John plus the community at which contribute
> highly valuable aspects to evolving “our” beat practices and judgements.
>
> Whether it’s positive or negative or proof of concept, it is how we
> get to where we “think” we should be.
>
> Criticism is how we get there regardless.
>
> Let’s cut out the other non-sense and discontinue this thread and work
> positively instead of against one-another. 
>
> -- 
>  J. Hellenthal
>
> The fact that there's a highway to Hell but only a stairway to Heaven
> says a lot about anticipated traffic volume.
>
> On Jan 12, 2019, at 17:26, Cummings, Chris  > wrote:
>
>> Can we please have a mod step in and shut this thread down? Any
>> conversation of value is long gone. 
>>
>> /Chris
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 5:25 PM -0600, "Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan"
>> mailto:g...@dombox.org>> wrote:
>>
>> I don't know why you are all try to defend a man who try to
>> silence my work.
>>
>> Are you saying this thread is necessary?
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 4:46 AM Töma Gavrichenkov
>> mailto:xima...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 12:51 AM Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
>> mailto:g...@dombox.org>> wrote:
>> > 5 months back I posted my spam research on DMARC list.
>> > You have gone through only 50 words and judged my work.
>> > The whole thread gone haywire because of you. I was
>> > humiliated there and left.
>>
>> By the way, since that you've left no traces of whatever
>> piece of work
>> you've posted to that list. The website is empty, slides are
>> removed
>> from Speakerdeck, etc.
>>
>> In theory, I can easily recall a few cases in my life when going
>> through just 50 words was quite enough for a judgment.
>>
>> > To be very honest, I don't like you.
>>
>> Please keep our busy mailing list out of this information,
>> though for
>> me it's a valuable piece of data that someone I don't know
>> personally
>> doesn't like someone else.
>>
>> > Although I don't like you, I still managed to respond
>> politely in
>> > IETF lists. Again... In that list the only thing you did was
>> > attacking my work.
>>
>> So, I've read the whole thread, and, as far as I can see,
>> there was
>> nothing coming from John except for a balanced judgement.
>>
>> > And then please tell me this man is not biased at all.
>>
>> Sorry, he's not.
>>
>> --
>> Töma
>>
>>
>>
>> -- 
>> Best Regards,
>>
>> Viruthagiri Thirumavalavan
>> Dombox, Inc.
>>