I'm not able to continue to receive mail at the apartment I lived at a decade ago. It turns out after I stopped paying for the apartment I lost the ability to control that mailbox.
This is a normal thing to happen in the physical world. We really shouldn't have such strict connections between email being a primary identifier for a user, requiring only a single one on an account, and not letting users change what they consider their primary email address. Email addresses can and should change over time. If someone really wants to ensure you have a piece of digital real estate one should get into the "ownership" game and get your own domain. People somehow end up buying and selling houses all the time which is far more complicated paperwork-wise, and yet we act like registering a domain name and configuring it for an email provider is just nearly impossible for normal people to handle.
Is there an RFC for email to redirect email for a user no longer at that address? Not exactly like setting up mail redirection with the postal service, but similar in outcome.
e.g. a server connects to the gmail MX server, and gets a response like "example@gmail.com now found at foo@example.com"
There's probably a ton of issues with this approach, but it would make switching email providers simpler on the user-end.
Most email platforms support some form of forwarding. Its not quite the same as your suggestion that's similar to an HTTP redirect but still the ability to configure your email user to just pass along those emails to another address is a common feature. These systems usually just rewrite the envelope recipient address and reprocesses the email based on that new address.
In the end though this still requires that original user to have exclusive ownership to that username in perpetuity and requires the email hoster to continue to actually host email services. It does nothing if, say, Google wanted to shut down email services on @gmail.com or start requiring paid accounts or whatever.
It's a giant pain in the ass in the real world. I don't think we should accept such friction for switching providers online just because we have such limits in superficially similar operations.
I don't disagree but how would that work given the existing internet infrastructure? The gmail domain and MX records will always necessarily be at the behest of google and so the label 'xyz@gmail.com' will always necessarily be 100% under their control.
The only real solution is to use your own domain and MX records, which anyone who cares about keeping a vanity email address should do. Which to me is the virtual equivalent of keeping a PO box or such.
Having migrated off an @gmail to a personal domain, yeah it's a pain, but you rip the bandaid off and you're free. Changing the address on my mail sucked when I bought a house, but it would be silly to never ever move because changing your mailing address is unpleasant.
Its not really just superficially similar, its incredibly similar. Its their servers, its their domain. If they want to stop hosting email services on their domain and delete gmail.com IN MX records they should be allowed to do so in line with whatever contractual promises they've made. If an apartment complex wants to shut down and tear down the building they can do so once they've completed all lease commitments.
What are you suggesting happen otherwise? Once you're an email provider you're forever committed to being an email provider for those users until the end of time?