782
So apparently Google will SPAM your self-hosted email just cuz **** you, that's why. (thelemmy.club)
submitted 1 week ago by to c/memes@lemmy.world
118 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

DKIM, DMARC, SPF, rDNS/PTR, EHLO... all correct and verified in the email "original source," BY GOOGLE. Still goes to SPAM folder because **** you, apparently. I hate Google.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 21 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Me and a couple other people have ran into on the internet have thought that we need to invent "email 2", a clean slate implementation of email that serves it's asynchronous long form and attachment friendly function while leaving behind Decades of Cruft . We can make it into an encrypted by default and have conveniences that we never had before. It might even be an actual useful thing instead of just being the thing you sign up for accounts with to get to 2fa codes and spam from websites you buy stuff from

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago* (1 child)

    Love this idea!

    I feel like Arcane/Delta Chat is a step toward this. It somehow uses an email protocol and it works just like Signal or any other message app! I dunno how the heck it works but it's super cool.

    That's something I want too: An open standard my friends and family can be on, where "the market" isn't.

    Edit: I see, it seems the issue in the main thread is:

    • Gmail blocks custom servers as spam 99% of the time.
    • 99% of normieverse uses Gmail. :(

    But getting people on other email providers to talk to each other... shouldn't be an issue then?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 4 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Frankly, I'm rather shocked it hasn't happened by now.

    We've tried to bandaid over it with various weird things, but fundamentally SMTP is just weird.

    I could easily imagine a domain having some SRV record to advertise "hey, I support NeoSMTP", and peers switching to that instead, possibly pinning on successful NeoSMTP negotiation.

    Get rid of a lot of the relaying which has not been useful in modern times and only a liability, and perhaps offer an https option to be less likely to be blocked (a TXT record to indicate url, and a node could declare their NeoSMTP entry point as https://mail.server/NeoSMTP/ or whatever works for them).

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 week ago (2 children)

    Oh, there have been plenty. The issue though is the classic "make a better standard, and now you have N+1 standards".
    Everything is wrong with SMTP. It's still in use because it's supported everywhere. Anything that wants to replace it either needs to entirely replace it in one fell swoop, or it needs to be backwards compatible.

    The result is that occasionally a new thing comes up, a handful of people try it but there isn't critical mass to make other features really useful so it fades.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 week ago (1 child)

    Hence my references to DNS records in addition to MX to determine if an endpoint is SMTP only or better. For compatible interop.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 week ago

    But that's the thing: now you haven't made an email replacement, you've made email more complicated.

    If you're backwards compatible you need a very compelling feature to get people to switch, and using the feature is limited until people switch.
    That's how we added spf, dkim, dmarc and starttls.
    The biggest difficulty is managing the layers of compatibility.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent