Guy Hulbert wrote: >> Frankly, we need a clean break from SMTP. Is anyone working on SMTP2? > > DJB has tried twice. QMTP and IM2000. He even tried to provide a > migration path for QMTP.
anyone know or care to guess why DJB has not had much success? I'll look into those protocols. . . As a first guess, DJB may not be open enough. His code is usually restricted even if his ideas are well explained. If you want people to adopt something this big you need to provide free and unrestricted code. BSD style license is preferred. Secondly, DJB doesn't seem to be interested in standards bodies. Why are there no rfc's or submissions of his new protocols to some standards bodies. People--especially businesses--like the idea that the standard is being reviewed and ratified by someone. (I could be wrong here. someone please point out standards submissions if you know of any) Third, perhaps his protocols are too different--or at least perceived to be too different--to be adopted. SMTP is so entrenched that telling people to completely throw it away is going to set them against you before they even listen to your ideas. The key phrase may be to 'modify the SMTP' protocol. Even if it means you end up with QMTP in the end by a different name it gives people the impression that there is less barrier to adoption. Still thinking outside the box ;) Thank you for entertaining my off topic posts this long. -- JT Moree
