Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the alternatives, was Service outages planned for April 25

Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com> Sat, 30 April 2022 02:43 UTC

Return-Path: <hallam@gmail.com>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A96FFC157B36 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 19:43:15 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.403
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.403 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.248, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.248, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([50.223.129.194]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QniHRqYd3PFA for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 19:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yb1-f173.google.com (mail-yb1-f173.google.com [209.85.219.173]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id AF73AC157B34 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 19:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yb1-f173.google.com with SMTP id m128so17469992ybm.5 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 19:43:11 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=9c6K56Y/LBDQZkJTswcUJTFyC7AiehzryVnNwO2J3XU=; b=ZvPDdc3k4YBiydAiHM1Ymp7DL5nnQ3bt2hwqgduoAFFfGIQ2QqyNO7RdmsrzYmb9aS K8Db6Wn2sKekTEwuRWduoMCFgKL+D8Wh/8hsvd9MygVcgFNHAKbkt2P4FXa5j5lA7tIM 3buHPSn5djQM2w+SW3SERFmTyfflGQgf00phqgDXnr3PhObsYT5V6XCD72y6/wI+mWGM HHWZpr693WV5ZVrSnTj5FEcuLW1FyXaVN6D7TzrV7wp5U1XAe1redexZn92UpeBpWcS7 gjMTtMeyuoeQRD8/Hs6w1kJTxjy6ry4hhFKvkVuzK/NREUnt2eQAXNbcEOhCaV2Xfj5x k89g==
X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532H5Rod8TzR5i7J8ErYxD0nsLj+AtuGyuvtTCGClB4mPUuUmx2j STbWhh1dJF/Xq4dbtM/8CNHql43LPkJ9koCKRvJlXGTu
X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzdRkOHCddk4If6MIFSyOQIE+bwMV1r2gplozdHrl8AEVaC321dK4VuLZQO6CQYJFzf1fo5W3tpDtYUT0Cd+ZQ=
X-Received: by 2002:a25:73cc:0:b0:648:a218:4adc with SMTP id o195-20020a2573cc000000b00648a2184adcmr2161459ybc.463.1651286590880; Fri, 29 Apr 2022 19:43:10 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <20220428221138.9BFD63F11488@ary.qy> <e11aeebf-22f6-b067-db4f-ea84fe41abc5@network-heretics.com>
In-Reply-To: <e11aeebf-22f6-b067-db4f-ea84fe41abc5@network-heretics.com>
From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <phill@hallambaker.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Apr 2022 22:42:59 -0400
Message-ID: <CAMm+Lwj7ZZn_enfkfMgLiSRaQbyEi6pBwoEdkdppA-=eOt8RRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Mail is worse than everything except all the alternatives, was Service outages planned for April 25
To: Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
Cc: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>, IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000abfece05ddd61e18"
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/fdGUnvW416zFuk-F_VIcaIp3uPk>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.34
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 30 Apr 2022 02:43:15 -0000

It will certainly be an unpopular thing to say but I will say it: Protocols
wear out over time.

We have patched SMTP again and again and again and at this point there are
more patches than protocol and there are holes we simply can't fix because
we have reached the limit.

I now have running code for my alternative messaging system but it is not a
replacement for mail, it is a messaging system for secure interactions like
2FA, payments, contact exchange, etc. I do not plan to do mail for quite a
while.

Mailing lists are a completely separate problem to mail messaging. You are
crossing the streams, do not do that unless you want bad things to happen.

For mailing list delivery, just switch to NNTP, someone has a gateway. it
worketh and it delivereth and there is no patch we can make to the SMTP
mail system that will be as convenient.





On Thu, Apr 28, 2022 at 6:30 PM Keith Moore <moore@network-heretics.com>
wrote:

> On 4/28/22 18:11, John Levine wrote:
>
> > It appears that Keith Moore  <moore@network-heretics.com> said:
> >> Also, why should it be a dark art to have legitimate email successfully
> >> delivered?
> > Because spammers try very hard to make their mail look like legitimate
> > mail, and unlike you, they have a financial incentive to figure out
> > and evade the filters.
> >
> > It may not seem fair, but it's reality. I would like to be able to set
> > up my new nice mail server and send my nice mail without having to do
> > SPF and DKIM and DMARC and MTA-STS and TLSA and IP reputation and
> > while I am waiting I would also like a pony.
>
> It's generally been my experience that people say "it's reality" in the
> same way that people sometimes say "it is clear that..." ... i.e. when
> they can't actually justify what they're saying, or they don't have the
> imagination to see how things could be different, or maybe, when they
> have an interest in maintaining the status quo.  It's a red flag, an
> anti-pattern.
>
> But you didn't actually answer my question.   Because getting your mail
> delivered is not just a matter of doing SPF and DKIM etc., it's black
> magic.   It's jumping through hoops that most people don't know exist,
> and the people who impose those hoops want to keep them somewhat
> secret... until they can impose more hoops.
>
> Which is great if you're in the hoop selling business I guess.
>
> It's a deplorable situation, and IETF shouldn't be propping it up.
>
> Keith
>
>
>