I think it is totally impractical to talk about moving 100 million users to anything. These are not the pioneer days of computing; there are hundreds of millions of people using computers today, and you aren't going to move them all to anything. It's rather like suggesting that North American switch from 120 VAC to 480 VDC for home electrical power. It's not going to happen. Look at QWERTY keyboards and NTSC if you believe otherwise.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dave Crocker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Paul Vixie" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 23:28 Subject: Re: Spam > Paul, > > PV> once thinking that smtp would be the right answer for a global population, > PV> or now thinking that smtp can be saved if we can just make abuse expensive, > PV> is indicative of designers who think that the only consumers are Just Like > PV> Them And Their Friends. they were but aren't, and they won't ever be again! > > > Unfortunately, casting the issue in terms of saving or discarding SMTP > is also unhelpful. It makes sure that we debate lots of protocol > details, without having any basic agreement on the more import usage and > protection details that will drive the mundane technical choices. > > On the other hand, a relevant point about current operations, versus > future operations, is how we move 100 million users. But again, that is > best discussed in terms of the users and their usage, rather than the > protocol details. > > So: What is this better service supposed to look like? How do we > transition a very large installed base to it. > > Extra credit: The transition question has more to do with user > motivation and choice than with technical engineering. > > d/ > -- > Dave Crocker <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Brandenburg InternetWorking <http://www.brandenburg.com> > Sunnyvale, CA USA <tel:+1.408.246.8253>, <fax:+1.866.358.5301> > > >
