Re: The ecosystem is moving

Phillip Hallam-Baker <> Fri, 13 May 2016 19:58 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id E185F12D14F for <>; Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:59 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.399
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.399 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.199, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key)
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id PYSaQl4pytwv for <>; Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400d:c09::236]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AB75712B065 for <>; Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:57 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with SMTP id n63so66755571qkf.0 for <>; Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:57 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc; bh=h+C0CACPFK6a99grLrfvriDuI7TKwg58E3brPek9UVY=; b=09AoKfG7g4kGRLhJE8tPc8R0j8CLWoYWpN8annauIMhTk7HTPcX/V3u7n2vorxUXEO DdssnJbyT0GWOcTprtAiUIN9N4jUTnc/07DOoK+oXuYdBafTrg9odXhwMDervhnFZJ5A Wysfi1gzDQ0gVpvvW75c2wjlkviKdLScUmQLSVL2upAbXyaZyw19ehDrEMGcLx/hOuLL ZeHj+Xouc89qxIT8NnunS0L1PG2wqVwbx/n8u5JTV6Pa/PlkDFWwEnJy4WRp2PH1Udsc nsZVXEOUIdQCa3rTboGUCysSPpghH4CtbX1Yy5wx3HuM81ByQydfX3BCneMFZRVG5u1C 0qQw==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc; bh=h+C0CACPFK6a99grLrfvriDuI7TKwg58E3brPek9UVY=; b=cUGUKYQqwGUqCBfDPHOpg5vTykit85IGGR3gat673hfg6j+VPSJblUwWid650fxj2i 9i4CUqpgsz9eRsLxcEBqMidyOUMUBOraNg7FAmSHLa9jJ5wGUUsmoGQyUqLYXcvMli2N ZBKknKsWPDi+kFlrigBtZBpB1BYob7tGZQiJV4DJ4faPUsou7syuSyxTitYoprbygKmC Lr8nKKox0DCw8WN1H+oogmlhvbj70vdZyR4TqflQsHFJlPmaZ37J8VfSWCES3AuBYcqe QOCll2igoA8ipKfDur9xP7T+4HVwIum57NjsKKpQjTQaC83Fy3t8O/zALGl6vU2h+xAK moJQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOPr4FX6LvnPdrk4HYHgInDWJd4j/UiQAFRJ4ifGJs+pBQH42lGjU9a9AP1j0kVuRbsJin2PfPd/TswHGagovg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id o68mr1047653qki.27.1463169536828; Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by with HTTP; Fri, 13 May 2016 12:58:56 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <> <> <> <> <> <>
Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 15:58:56 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: rDIsBwAXEmn9zBtCU-VZNTrQMk8
Message-ID: <>
Subject: Re: The ecosystem is moving
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <>
To: Dave Crocker <>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1149dbda7d45710532beb455
Archived-At: <>
Cc: Paul Wouters <>, Dave Crocker <>, " Discussion" <>
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 13 May 2016 19:59:00 -0000

On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 3:52 PM, Dave Crocker <> wrote:

> On 5/13/2016 11:20 AM, Ted Lemon wrote:
>> On Fri, May 13, 2016 at 1:56 PM, Dave Crocker <
>>     To date, we really only have two services that demonstrate open (ie,
>>     multi-administration) interoperability at Internet scale:  email and
>>     DNS.
> So, yes, I did intend my comment to be provocative and did suspect I was
> missing one or another service.  But I also messed up, by not making clear
> I was targeting open, /distributed/, /applications-level/ services. (And
> yes, for this kind of discussion, DNS is an application.)
> That is, I meant the qualifying test to be that there often is casual
> interoperability across a /sequence/ of independent administrations, and
> use by a very large fraction of the Internet.
> Alia's BGP reference was the biggest surprise -- thank you, Alia! --
> because I think it /does/ qualify and it hadn't occurred to me.
> The problem with all of the others cited above is that they aren't at used
> at scale or aren't really used with open, multi-hop interoperability.  Much
> of the list, above, is for lower-layer protocols.
> FTP and HTTP are simple, single-hop client/server mechanisms.  The latter
> is, of course, widely used, but it's a one-hop service.  (In reality, of
> course, the web has all sorts of additional hops, if one looks at content
> distribution, and other mechanisms, but they are behind the scenes and
> under tight control.)

And so will email when we fix it.

I don't think SMTP is a good model to follow. The core problem is that many
of the problems that should have been handled by support in the protocol
were implemented with ad hoc perl scripts performing store and forward.

So as a result mailing lists don't really work very well, security is
poorly integrated and there is an upper limit on message size.

The reason no other application meets Dave's criteria is that they are bad