[ih] The Decline and Fall of Internet Email?

[Jack Haverty]

Getting back to the "history" focus...

In the ancient times of the Internet, 1970s and 1980s, email was 
considered a core function of the net.  The three major uses of the net 
were remote login to "your" computer far away, file transfers between 
computers that you were allowed to use, and electronic mail.   
Electronic mail was the only one which provided human-to-human 
communications with any user who had access to some computer on the net.

As a core function, the network management and technocracy made sure it 
all worked.  For example, when the Arpanet was split apart to become the 
Defense Data Network, "mailbridges" were put in place to assure that 
email could pass across the boundaries.  Mailbridges were effectively 
"forwarders" as we continue to use today.   They were critical parts of 
the network service, and relied upon by many projects and 
organizations.  One example here: 
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADA210749.pdf

To make this all work, lots of people were involved.  Techies had to 
plan, develop, and deploy the appropriate mechanisms.  Managers had to 
make sure all of the necessary components were funded and developed 
where necessary, and deployed in such a way to make email service 
continually reliable.

Some of these efforts were quite complicated, with significant planning 
and careful execution required.  For one example, see 
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc1133

"Forwarding" email was a core function of the network.   Email had to 
always work.  Various "management" organizations, such as the US 
Department of Defense and the National Science Foundation, made it work.

Today (literally), it seems that email is broken and unreliable and 
there is little reason to believe it will improve.  Technical mechanisms 
may be inadequate, incomplete, or simply not deployed. Management, 
whoever that is for the Internet now, seems unaware or unconcerned or 
unable to fix it.  I've personally recently heard from non-technical 
users that their "email is broken".  They of course have no idea why or 
what to do about it.

In contrast, there are dozens, maybe more, alternatives to traditional 
Internet email.  Social media sites all offer ways to "message" others 
in their community silos.  Apps, e.g., Signal, Telegram, offer similar 
ways for humans to interact.   Various "forums" on the Web provide ways 
to hold online discussions with organizational tools (e.g., 
"subreddits") that Internet email lacks.  All of these provide functions 
similar to traditional Internet email, but, as far as I can tell, none 
of them interoperate with anyone else.

As "mere mortal" Internet users notice the deteriorating situation, 
they're no doubt tempted to switch to some other, more reliable, system 
for communicating with their friends, organizations, corporate services, 
and even governments, if they offer some alternative way to interact.   
Personally I frequently get email from some sender (bank, medical, 
government) advising me to log in to their alternative system to read 
and respond to an important message.

Electronic mail used to be "the" mechanism for human-to-human 
communication over the 'net.  Now it seems to be just one of many 
"silos" of communications mechanisms that people can use, and the 
"important" email seems to be moving away from traditional email into 
one or more silos.   Internet email seems to be rapidly evolving into 
the mechanism for "junk mail".

Am I wrong?  Am I missing something?

For history's sake, how did the reliability of network email get from 
the 1980s to today?

Jack Haverty


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: OpenPGP_signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 665 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://elists.isoc.org/pipermail/internet-history/attachments/20240210/a938fd3a/attachment.asc>