On Wed 31 Aug 2016 at 13:14:08 +0000, Amir H. Firouzian wrote: > There is a trade off between decentralization & reliability. Traditional > E-Mail that people are talking about is NOT TRULY decentral. > For instance think about how E-Mail work: > 1- Mail Client Query MX record from DNS
IM systems don't do this too? What do they use? Telepathy? > 2- Connect to SMTP Server and Exchange E-Mail. Ok. That's unarguable. > 3- SMTP figure out the sender IP and look domain of E-Mail My server doesn't do that. I suppose I could instruct it to. > 3- SMTP server query SRV Record of that domain and check is that IP valid. My server doesn't do that. I suppose I could instruct it to. > 4- (Nowadays) SMTP query DKIM (Which is TXT record) and validate also. My server doesn't necessarily do that; it depends; I suppose I could instruct it never to do it. > So think how BITMESSAGE > <https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bitmessage&oldid=734000991>: > 1- The massage ONLY can access in TWO DAYS! > 2- All Nodes have ALL E-Mail in Cryptic Form. The link says Bitmessage is a decentralized, encrypted, peer-to-peer, trustless communications protocol that can be used by one person to send encrypted messages to another person, or to multiple subscribers. How does this sound? Email is a decentralized, encrypted, peer-to-peer, trustless communications protocol that can be used by one person to send encrypted messages to another person, or to multiple subscribers. > About you last sentence: > It's better that your message Not arrive instead of being disclose! and > This is the philosophy behind True P2P IM systems. It's a lousy philosophy. The purpose of communication systems is to communicate reliably. I think you must have some special circumstances in mind.
