Jan 15, 17 / Aqu 15, 01 00:35 UTC

Re: Asgardia exclusive email addresses  

I don't think this will have much impact on recognition by the UN, with them concentrating on more serious things that can actually matter.

If going for entire TLD - why limit to just three letters? .Asgardia IMHO would be "better". More professional.

Jan 15, 17 / Aqu 15, 01 00:59 UTC

Country TLD standards are 2 letter, e.g.. Australia = .au, New Zealand = .nz, United Kingdom = .uk Singapore = .sg etc

Therefore we would need to look at one that is 2 letter and not already in use to maintain the same standard.

Jan 15, 17 / Aqu 15, 01 22:19 UTC

My point was why attempt to adhere to ISO3166, which isn't long term scalable with regards to future expansion, adjustments of country names etc - you're gonna run outta even four letter codes eventually.

If you are attempting to adhere to ISO3166 then first you need UN recognition before they'll accept an application, and then you don't get to decide on the code ISO3166/MA does.

And really, do we need one, anyway? what problem(s) does this solve? It's also extra infrastructure to be maintaining, look at the struggle with operating a website... From RFC 1591:

 That is, the actual management of the assigning of domain names, delegating subdomains and operating nameservers must be done with technical competence.

Has there really been any displayed evidence the "IT team" would be actually capable of adhering to that statement?

Jan 18, 17 / Aqu 18, 01 19:06 UTC

We don't need to follow the format of the world. We can do our own thing

Jan 18, 17 / Aqu 18, 01 21:18 UTC

Seems pointless when alternatives are already in place. I have a work email I don't use, I very much doubt I'd use a national one. I'll stick to Gmail to now.

Jan 19, 17 / Aqu 19, 01 11:33 UTC

I do not see why the government can not have its own mail server, it's good for security, it's good for the historical record. Just as they should have their own SQL database server. Facilitates backups, etc. As for other non-government citizens, just like today, they can have email wherever they want.

Jan 23, 17 / Aqu 23, 01 18:58 UTC

I think only officials and actually persons that will live in Asgardia should get an email address, let's be honest, what percentage of actual users will care of another free mailbox?

Jan 25, 17 / Aqu 25, 01 08:32 UTC

Honestly, quite a lot of users would care for it.

To ignore the possibility of forming a semi-trustable platform for such(as most users seem incapable of operating their own services) and to ignore the general novelty factor, then there's still considerable interest - as evidenced by replies to this thread. Three pages of. Only a small number are in disagreement.

I'm only in disagreement for the resource draw I feel could be "better" spent at this time, but overall I think it's a great idea. I've no need for another free mailbox, I have servers I can generate as many as I would like. I just think other users would care for such. Another reason I push towards XMPP as a comms protocol is the user ID's follow the same format as email, which most users are already comfortable with - and with a little cunning DNS delegation the same address could work mulitple subservices, making tying it all together easier.

As for "officials" having "their own mailserver" - almost.

;; ANSWER SECTION: asgadia.space. 3600 IN MX 5 mail.h-email.net.

They've used someone else's - and they appear to run clones of that on EC2, so that can be considered compromised already... NTT trading in the US isn't an overly good sign - as anyone who recalls lavabit(heard that's starting back up) should know - Isn't it great when people know what they're doing...

  Updated  on Jan 25, 17 / Aqu 25, 01 08:37 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: typo, additional data.

Jan 25, 17 / Aqu 25, 01 16:31 UTC

In regards to the section regarding the price of Hardware quoted below, getting a raid would reduce the usable space by a bit. Also for reliability reasons it is wise to have a second identical installation on another location, that would double the cost and we are still missing a backup solution.
Still just talking about hardware.

From a post by EyeR:

As previously specifed, the largest barrier will be the storage space for the user's inboxes, which again, at current population levels, and to be using the 8TB HGST drives because they're slightly cheaper than the 10TB ones(and larger tested for reliability) we're still looking at over 350 of them to provide just a poxy 5GB of inbox per user - 2.75PB(petabyte) of storage. To assume the HD's will sit in a standard 4U blade, and to select a model you can cram 60 HD's into a blade(more common to see numbers like 24), that's then another 6 nodes that need hosting(purchase fee of 350 HD's, purchase of 6 blade chassis, purchase of 6 motherboard, potentially requirement to buy 6 sets of networking hardware, likely to require additional RAID cards per unit as one-off fee, then the monthly cost of powering and keeping connected to interwebs) - to assume each chassis costs about $200USD(likely more), each motherboard & CPU to be about $250USD, about the same for the RAID card(s) in each system(assume the front panel splits into backplanes, allowing to fit 5x SAS drives to a single cable, and the RAID has five slots, you'd need three RAID cards per 60 bay chassis, 18 total) making the cost in obtaining the HD's alone $122,500USD, and requiring about $126,700USD total just to buy the hardware - Then there's likely setup costs at the datacentre(we could do with our own one of them, too, ideally more than one) and ofc fees to keep all that powered, cool, and connected.

  Last edited by:  Jonathan Stephan (Asgardian)  on Jan 26, 17 / Aqu 26, 01 06:14 UTC, Total number of edits: 2 times

Jan 26, 17 / Aqu 26, 01 11:17 UTC

Those figures are now inaccurate, the citizen count took a 500k drop since I did that.

RAID doesn't reduce the usable space, that much, not compared to how much it can give. Other technologies like LVM could possible create a larger storage space with the same hardware, but with the array complexity required a hardware solution should be more usable.

  Updated  on Jan 26, 17 / Aqu 26, 01 11:17 UTC, Total number of edits: 1 time
Reason: typo

Jan 28, 17 / Pis 00, 01 16:15 UTC

Technically, there already is one - it's just not got an inbox for every citizen. I only return a handfull of live mailboxes.

There's no need to purchase additional domains(although, the current one has a short rental period) existing domains can be provided(already have) mx records. If desired, additional sub-domains can be spit out at will, costless. They can have mx records, too. The only "cost" should be the storing and retrival of user's mail. Even with the significant registered population reduction then this will mean purchase of additional hardware just to hold the HD's(to take current readings of 161893 and to give them and inbox of 5GB each - tiny - then that's 790.49TB or almost a Petabyte of storage. To ignore options like the PM1633a then it'd sensibly be split across something like 100x HUH728080ALE600 ... which would be about $5kUSD on it's own, before you think about a computer - or more likely 5 - to put them in. Or having that(them) hosted. Then you have to consider backups, which should at least double this cost...

It's something that should happen - eventually - IMHO. I don't see it happening rapidly however.

Apr 26, 17 / Gem 04, 01 23:24 UTC

While the idea is good, but personally, I think it's not a must thing for a near future.