On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 12:00:20PM +0100, Philip Homburg wrote:
On Tue, Mar 14, 2017 at 3:38 AM, Philip Homburg
<pch-ietf-6(_at_)u-1(_dot_)phicoh(_dot_)com>
wrote:
In my experience, essentially no mail gets lost if you leave out SPF, DKIM,
DMARC. The only exception is gmail that occasionally rejects e-mail.
"no mail gets lost" != "gmail occasionally rejects my mail"
What I meant to write is that when I take all e-mail targets that I send
e-mail
to, leaving out gmail, then sending mail without SPF, DKIM, DMARC works just
fine.
Gmail is an exception because it seems that gmail is broken if you deliver
mail without SPF, etc. over IPv6 to gmail. That's unique to gmail.
The problem is twofold: a) gmail has a huge number of mailboxes, so if
you can't deliver to them without SPF/DKIM/DMARC, then your mail truly
is broken, b) they could be setting the rule, so that even if you don't
mind (a), you soon will feel the pain.
So if your outgoing mail doesn't have SPF, etc. and you do have IPv6, then
you have to think about what to do with gmail.
As a user, when I send email, I don't want to think about this sort of
thing. An admin has to think about this sort of thing, and it's looking
a lot like email is nowhere near the relatively easy service to run that
it was in the 90s.
In some sense it is amazing how reliable e-mail is. E-mail seems to be
reliable enough that gmail rejecting the occasional e-mail immediately
makes it the most unreliable e-mail provider (for my e-mail).
That's also an amazing success story.
Well, I adore email, and email lists. Screw the haters. But it's true
that we have a problem, and if we don't manage it then email will be
obsolete and I'll be sad.
Do you imagine that you may be making different choices than others?
Imagine that some will be making different chocies than me, yes.
Balkanizing email doesn't sound very good to me.
Nico
--