4 ms·

Why on top of SES? why not SMTP?

by v3ss0n 2y ago

Gys 2y ago
Because AWS SES offers an API for sending mails and IMAP is a protocol for a mail client talking to a mail server?
- v3ss0n 2y ago
  Fixed, I meant SMTP. SES is not open protocol and it's not self hostable. no point in using this for selfhost env
jdpedrie 2y ago
Because if you send marketing emails through SMTP, your delivery rate will be approximately 0.00%, or if you're leveraging a third party SMTP, they will ban you.
- v3ss0n 2y ago
  Very good point.Thats the most painful point in selfhosting email .
- prmoustache 2y ago
  > or if you're leveraging a third party SMTP, they will ban you. Not if you are paying them for the service. There are ommercial email services that aren't google/microsoft/aws. My former company used to use one (can't remember the name) that provided you with smtp servers and a set of dedicated IPs per customers that were preused by them to build a good reputation beforehand. I think the point is not necessary that you have to selfhost email (although it can be done, some people do), but depending on a single vendor through a proprietary service/API.
aidenn0 2y ago
Because delivery rates through self-hosted SMTP are lower than through commercial e-mail delivery services; the latter being close to unity[1] and the former ranging from near-zero to about 7/8 depending on how much work and time you put into doing things. 1: My "close to unity" number comes from my experience with the mailgun APIs, I assume that SES is similar.
- crote 2y ago
  I absolutely hate how it feels like the e-mail delivery services and Google/Microsoft/whatever are working together to form a protection racket: sure would be a shame if your email were to get lost, better pay us to guarantee it makes it to its destination... Imagine the outrage if your national snail mail carrier were to shred 50% of all mail which didn't have a Premium Protection stamp. Why do we let the big cloud hosters get away with it?

Why on top of SES? why not SMTP?

by v3ss0n 2y ago

Why on top of SES? why not SMTP?

Gys 2y ago

Because AWS SES offers an API for sending mails and IMAP is a protocol for a mail client talking to a mail server?

v3ss0n 2y ago
Fixed, I meant SMTP. SES is not open protocol and it's not self hostable. no point in using this for selfhost env

jdpedrie 2y ago

Because if you send marketing emails through SMTP, your delivery rate will be approximately 0.00%, or if you're leveraging a third party SMTP, they will ban you.

v3ss0n 2y ago
Very good point.Thats the most painful point in selfhosting email .
prmoustache 2y ago
> or if you're leveraging a third party SMTP, they will ban you. Not if you are paying them for the service. There are ommercial email services that aren't google/microsoft/aws. My former company used to use one (can't remember the name) that provided you with smtp servers and a set of dedicated IPs per customers that were preused by them to build a good reputation beforehand. I think the point is not necessary that you have to selfhost email (although it can be done, some people do), but depending on a single vendor through a proprietary service/API.

aidenn0 2y ago

Because delivery rates through self-hosted SMTP are lower than through commercial e-mail delivery services; the latter being close to unity[1] and the former ranging from near-zero to about 7/8 depending on how much work and time you put into doing things. 1: My "close to unity" number comes from my experience with the mailgun APIs, I assume that SES is similar.

crote 2y ago
I absolutely hate how it feels like the e-mail delivery services and Google/Microsoft/whatever are working together to form a protection racket: sure would be a shame if your email were to get lost, better pay us to guarantee it makes it to its destination... Imagine the outrage if your national snail mail carrier were to shred 50% of all mail which didn't have a Premium Protection stamp. Why do we let the big cloud hosters get away with it?