Exactly, replacing SMTP for email alone is a non-starter.
But it is entirely possible to replace a subset of SMTP functionality that the
protocol handles poorly or provide a better superset.
For example, NNTP gots its start by providing a more efficient means of
distributing mailing lists. RSS is now plugging the same niche in a much more
scalable manner.
Alternatively, it is quite possible that a future protocol might address
asynchronous and synchronous messaging in a wide spectrum of media (short
message, mail messag, audio, video) in a better fashion than is provided in
separate protocols today.
The key here however is the fact that switching costs for 'email' are not the
same as switching costs for 'SMTP'. Providing new protocol servers also support
the old, a transition could leverage the DNS to effect a seamless transition.
SRV and DNS policy signalling are your friend.
That said, any new protocol would have to use the DNS and MIME content types at
a minimum.
________________________________
From: John C Klensin [mailto:john-ietf(_at_)jck(_dot_)com]
Sent: Tue 10/28/2008 1:12 PM
To: Hallam-Baker, Phillip; Andrew G. Malis
Cc: tbray(_at_)textuality(_dot_)com; IETF Discussion
Subject: RE: placing a dollar value on IETF IP.
--On Tuesday, 28 October, 2008 08:02 -0700 "Hallam-Baker,
Phillip" <pbaker(_at_)verisign(_dot_)com> wrote:
...
It is also a neat rebuttal to the claim that network effects
do not exist - as Margolis and co claimed in their laughable
tract. If the issue were decided on technical grounds alone
the US and Europe would have chosen the same base years ago.
The US has not moved to the superior Swan mount because the
short term switching costs outweigh the long term advantages.
Change is only possible when a technology disruption occurs
that negates the advantage of the legacy base. In the case of
lightbulbs it is compact flourescents and LED bulbs, in the
case of keyboards it would probably take really good
handwriting recognition.
One could, of course, make many of the same observations about
replacing SMTP and/or today's Internet mail formats with some
newly-invented and improved system, replacing HTTP with
something more elegantly designed based on what we know about
computer systems today, etc., as well as failure to harmonize
residential supply voltages around the world. Whether the
problem is one of network effects or the related one of the
costs of replacing/ converting a large installed base, the
consequences are the same: mere incremental technical
superiority is almost never sufficient to motivate an
incompatible change.
john
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf