4 ms·

I used to do this. What finally killed it wasn't reputation, it was the fact that I needed 100% uptime or risk losing messages, getting my address blacklisted,

I used to do this. What finally killed it wasn't reputation, it was the fact that I needed 100% uptime or risk losing messages, getting my address blacklisted, etc. Email is supposed to be resilient to down time (retries, trying each MX record, etc.) but I found that large mail providers tend to just bounce and walk away. Worse, GitHub (back in 2016 and 2018) would mark a recipient as "unavailable" after a single bounce, refusing to send any more notifications to that address. They since improved the situation and their support was actually very helpful and responsive here, but it's pretty clear that modern SMTP senders have an expectation that recipients will be "always online" that didn't exist when the protocol was invented.

logifail 1y ago
> it was the fact that I needed 100% uptime or risk losing messages Q: If your server(s) is/are offline for a few hours, why would you "lose messages"? I've just checked my own email server -> "up 219 days" Honestly, compared with the stuff we do all day, this is not hard...
- toast0 1y ago
  > Q: If your server(s) is/are offline for a few hours, why would you "lose messages"? They said... >> Email is supposed to be resilient to down time (retries, trying each MX record, etc.) but I found that large mail providers tend to just bounce and walk away. I take that to mean that if your server isn't availble to receive the mail at the time it is first offered, it won't be retried later. That wasn't the case (for most mail) when I gave up on self hosting 10 years ago, but it's plausible.
  - Krei-se 1y ago
    It's not reasonable. Mail not deliverable is not the same as house burned down, recipient moved unknown or sth, it simply means the letter was not received. Who and why messed up is unknown, thus NO mail server will mark you down after a single attempt. Host your own!!
    - toast0 1y ago
      Reasonable and plausible are different things. I wouldn't be surprised if some outgoing servers just never get around to sending retries.
  - logifail 1y ago
    > I take that to mean that if your server isn't availble to receive the mail at the time it is first offered, it won't be retried later. Umm, RFC 5321, which describes queuing and retry? SMTP is designed to be very forgiving of transient network issues. > That wasn't the case (for most mail) when I gave up on self hosting 10 years ago, but it's plausible Plausible? To those of us who run our own mailservers, the OP's statement is an extraordinary claim.
Krei-se 1y ago
This is fearmongering. My mails always got resent after some hours or a day. It's absolutely NOT possible to tell if the problem is on your side, senders side or somewhere in between why a mail is not delivered once and no standard server config would simply toss it. Host your own mail. I get 99% deliverability with 0 repuation since i do dkim and spf correct. Don't be distracted by the "complexity" - if you config right it's totally doable. Gives you actual private caldav too btw
- jasode 1y ago
  >I get 99% deliverability with 0 repuation since i do dkim and spf correct. Your anecdote of success doesn't matter to the others that correctly configured DKIM/SPF and still don't get their emails delivered to Gmail/Outlook/Yahoo/etc. E.g. : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 One of the reasons for hard-to-diagnose sending failures is that Gmail/Outlook have "extra invisible rules" that override correct DKIM/SPF settings because spammers and phishers also have correct DKIM/SPF. So they use extra heuristics such as "ip reputation" etc. And even after one gets it working, e.g. "submit some form" to Microsoft and wait a few days to get things unblocked... the deliverability may break again because of another "invisible heuristic". EDIT to reply: >No, that's because your relay overwrites part of the header which makes dkim strict break. Change to relaxed or don't modify the header on your relay. Delivery reliability can still break without using a relay. In fact, this unreliability of 100% self-hosting at home is why some self-hosters split it into a hybrid setup and add an external relay for outgoing SMTP and only keep self-hosting for receiving email.
  - Krei-se 1y ago
    No, that's because your relay overwrites part of the header which makes dkim strict break. Change to relaxed or don't modify the header on your relay. Outlook business will accept your mail, Outlook private may filter, but the rates fluctuate so heavy i suspect its rules based on user behaiviour/interests. I dono, cant have both spamfree inbox and 0 false positives.
  - deleted 1y ago
    [deleted]
dijit 1y ago
I have a feature (called greylisting) whereby my server intentionally rejects the first mail it receives from a domain. I have never had anyone claim that their mail has not been delivered to me, and I get a lot of mail. Retry is built in to the spec, and if you’re really worried you can put a second “receive” SMTP server on the internet with a lower priority, and have it backhaul with LMTP. ——— Email was designed in a time where hosts were not perpetually connected to each other.
- Symbiote 1y ago
  GMail itself will sometimes temporarily reject messages, then accept them later. I have Postfix logs showing things like "this address is receiving a high rate of email" which are later accepted.
  - auxbuss 1y ago
    Gmail always rejects the first email I send to a new gmail account. It does this every time – and has done for years – despite the fact I have sent emails to hundreds of other gmail accounts, and send emails to such accounts every day. This is the reason I personally will not touch any Google services. And in business, I excise Google services as a priority. If a company cannot handle email in a civil manner, it certainly can't be trusted with anything of importance.
BikiniPrince 1y ago
I know right. It’s like, “what did they do to my boy?” as to huddle over the bullet ridden corpse of your son.

logifail 1y ago

> it was the fact that I needed 100% uptime or risk losing messages Q: If your server(s) is/are offline for a few hours, why would you "lose messages"? I've just checked my own email server -> "up 219 days" Honestly, compared with the stuff we do all day, this is not hard...

toast0 1y ago
> Q: If your server(s) is/are offline for a few hours, why would you "lose messages"? They said... >> Email is supposed to be resilient to down time (retries, trying each MX record, etc.) but I found that large mail providers tend to just bounce and walk away. I take that to mean that if your server isn't availble to receive the mail at the time it is first offered, it won't be retried later. That wasn't the case (for most mail) when I gave up on self hosting 10 years ago, but it's plausible.
- Krei-se 1y ago
  It's not reasonable. Mail not deliverable is not the same as house burned down, recipient moved unknown or sth, it simply means the letter was not received. Who and why messed up is unknown, thus NO mail server will mark you down after a single attempt. Host your own!!
  - toast0 1y ago
    Reasonable and plausible are different things. I wouldn't be surprised if some outgoing servers just never get around to sending retries.
- logifail 1y ago
  > I take that to mean that if your server isn't availble to receive the mail at the time it is first offered, it won't be retried later. Umm, RFC 5321, which describes queuing and retry? SMTP is designed to be very forgiving of transient network issues. > That wasn't the case (for most mail) when I gave up on self hosting 10 years ago, but it's plausible Plausible? To those of us who run our own mailservers, the OP's statement is an extraordinary claim.

Krei-se 1y ago

This is fearmongering. My mails always got resent after some hours or a day. It's absolutely NOT possible to tell if the problem is on your side, senders side or somewhere in between why a mail is not delivered once and no standard server config would simply toss it. Host your own mail. I get 99% deliverability with 0 repuation since i do dkim and spf correct. Don't be distracted by the "complexity" - if you config right it's totally doable. Gives you actual private caldav too btw

jasode 1y ago
>I get 99% deliverability with 0 repuation since i do dkim and spf correct. Your anecdote of success doesn't matter to the others that correctly configured DKIM/SPF and still don't get their emails delivered to Gmail/Outlook/Yahoo/etc. E.g. : https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32715437 One of the reasons for hard-to-diagnose sending failures is that Gmail/Outlook have "extra invisible rules" that override correct DKIM/SPF settings because spammers and phishers also have correct DKIM/SPF. So they use extra heuristics such as "ip reputation" etc. And even after one gets it working, e.g. "submit some form" to Microsoft and wait a few days to get things unblocked... the deliverability may break again because of another "invisible heuristic". EDIT to reply: >No, that's because your relay overwrites part of the header which makes dkim strict break. Change to relaxed or don't modify the header on your relay. Delivery reliability can still break without using a relay. In fact, this unreliability of 100% self-hosting at home is why some self-hosters split it into a hybrid setup and add an external relay for outgoing SMTP and only keep self-hosting for receiving email.
- Krei-se 1y ago
  No, that's because your relay overwrites part of the header which makes dkim strict break. Change to relaxed or don't modify the header on your relay. Outlook business will accept your mail, Outlook private may filter, but the rates fluctuate so heavy i suspect its rules based on user behaiviour/interests. I dono, cant have both spamfree inbox and 0 false positives.
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]

dijit 1y ago

I have a feature (called greylisting) whereby my server intentionally rejects the first mail it receives from a domain. I have never had anyone claim that their mail has not been delivered to me, and I get a lot of mail. Retry is built in to the spec, and if you’re really worried you can put a second “receive” SMTP server on the internet with a lower priority, and have it backhaul with LMTP. ——— Email was designed in a time where hosts were not perpetually connected to each other.

Symbiote 1y ago
GMail itself will sometimes temporarily reject messages, then accept them later. I have Postfix logs showing things like "this address is receiving a high rate of email" which are later accepted.
- auxbuss 1y ago
  Gmail always rejects the first email I send to a new gmail account. It does this every time – and has done for years – despite the fact I have sent emails to hundreds of other gmail accounts, and send emails to such accounts every day. This is the reason I personally will not touch any Google services. And in business, I excise Google services as a priority. If a company cannot handle email in a civil manner, it certainly can't be trusted with anything of importance.

BikiniPrince 1y ago

I know right. It’s like, “what did they do to my boy?” as to huddle over the bullet ridden corpse of your son.