Tell HN: Gmail rate limiting emails from AWS SES
67 points by saradhi 1 year ago | 87 commentsBackground:
One of my apps provides time-sensitive email notifications, for 60-90 days, to the subscribers(paid) - so it is critical to deliver emails. We have been using the same email provider and have been using AWS SES for a couple of years now. We have the SPF, and DKIM all verified. Yet, for the last 3 days, we are getting the below email
```
Sub: Delivery Status Notification (Failure)
Body: Our system has detected an unusual rate of<CRLF>421-4.7.28 unsolicited mail originating from your IP address. To protect our<CRLF>421-4.7.28 users from spam, mail sent from your IP address has been temporarily<CRLF>421-4.7.28 rate limited. Please visit<CRLF>421-4.7.28 https://support.google.com/mail/?p=UnsolicitedRateLimitError to<CRLF>421 4.7.28 review our Bulk Email Senders Guidelines.>
```
Troubleshooting till now: I have got the AWS tech support team confirming my email configuration has no issues. AWS team has informed "The current throttling is just that Gmail is seeing a lot of messages from the SES shared IP and is throttling the messages"
>>> Is anyone facing the same issue with AWS? or similar issues with other bulk email service providers?
>>> How do you deal with such issues in the future? Set up alternative email service providers.
>>> Is this the side effect of Gmail's dormant account deletion rolled out last week?
- jeroenhd 1 year agoThings like this are to be expected with shared IP addresses for mail services.
This sounds like something Amazon should figure out more than anything. There's probably something going on with a customer or theirs (misconfiguration, spammer, vulnerability exploited) that's triggering spam detection rules.
At least Google reports the issue back to you instead of silently dropping all of your email like many other mail servers do.
- nomilk 1 year agoVery useful thread. I recently considered SES for a quick app and didn't discover the purpose of dedicated IPs. They're listed under add ons, but seem somewhat essential if the emails are important.
Checking out the pricing page, a dedicated IP costs $24.95 per month, which would be more than the actual cost of emails for many small-medium apps (e.g. 100K emails per month would be about $10).
Ooc, do other email providers have the same shared-IP problem? E.g. Mailgun, Postmark, Sendgrid?
- LinuxBender 1 year agodo other email providers have the same shared-IP problem?
Yes, that is why they let people get a dedicated IP pools and FCrDNS using their corporation name for a price. It is not uncommon for the shared IP pools to get rate limits, temporary blocks, etc... and the corporation specific dedicated IP's are more likely to get through especially if they handle UCE complaints properly.
- nomilk 1 year ago> Yes
I didn't spend a huge amount of time reading the docs (just enough to get up and running), but I didn't notice this about other providers either. Great to be aware of this for future reference.
- nomilk 1 year ago
- dubcanada 1 year agoPostmark spends A LOT of effort to keep their shared IPs perfect. Rather complex setup with verification. And lots of stuff in place to prevent anything spam related.
But everyone else doesn't really care much.
- shmoogy 1 year agoDedicated can be an issue unless you have sufficient volume, unless I've been mislead in the past.
- bdcravens 1 year agoSendgrid's cheapest plan with a dedicated IP is $89/mo.
- LinuxBender 1 year ago
- alyandon 1 year agoI finally started sending anything from AWS SES straight to trash because the spam on their platform is persistent and they are non-responsive to spam reports. I was getting 30+ fraudulent/spam emails a day in just one inbox alone.
- nostrebored 1 year agoThat's untrue. I can tell you that spam reports and bounces are monitored, and customers do have to go through validation of their workflows if they breach thresholds.
I had to help multiple customers who had access to SES shut off for valid use cases because they didn't handle events coming back from customers appropriately.
- alyandon 1 year ago
If they are, I saw no evidence of that (except for the initial auto-response) based on the numerous spam reports I manually submitted with headers, dates/times and body content.I can tell you that spam reports and bounces are monitored
If you work for SES, you all aren't acting swiftly enough to shut down egregious spam operators using your platform that are making other people's lives miserable.
- dpifke 1 year agoI have never gotten a response to an SES spam report.
A quick search turns up 50 or so in my sent mail folder within the past year or two.
3 of the most recent 5 reports are all the same message content (likely the same sender, although possibly using different—maybe hacked—accounts).
By way of comparison, I've sent a similar volume of complaints to Twilio Sendgrid, received a response to every single complaint, and a random sampling of recent reports doesn't show any repeat message content.
Google doesn't even provide a way to report spam from Gmail users, which is ironic given the OP is complaining about Google's aggressive spam blocking. Spam from Gmail is comparable in volume to what I receive from SES and Sendgrid, and almost all of those messages are obvious phishing and 419 scams. (One would think one of the largest tech companies in the world would be able to implement basic filters to catch these, if they cared enough to do so.) Cf. spam from SES, which is mostly either cryptocurrency pump-and-dump, or semi-legit companies sending to spamtrap addresses that appear on publicly-indexed web pages, in WHOIS, etc. but which have been never used for real correspondence (and have obviously never opted in to any lists).
- 0ct4via 1 year agoYour experience of customers not handling events appropriately - and then having SES access revoked - does not negate or disprove alyandon's experience of getting no responses to spam reports.
You may have had a different experience, but that doesn't make their (differing) experience "untrue."
- 1 year ago
- alyandon 1 year ago
- moltar 1 year agoNot sure if this is an edge case or not. But getting approved for SES isn’t that simple. And then shut downs happen very quickly even for legitimate cases. AWS is very aggressive with SES.
- alyandon 1 year agoMaybe they care now. They certainly did not appear to care when my mailbox was getting spammed into uselessness by their customers.
- alyandon 1 year ago
- nostrebored 1 year ago
- baobabKoodaa 1 year agoGoogle also silently drops mail in some cases.
- jeroenhd 1 year agoI've never experienced that. When mail gets dropped, my experience is that you either receive a notice from the SMTP service or get a DMARC report that tells you about the percentage of dropped mail.
- baobabKoodaa 1 year agoPlease explain how you measured your email deliverability.
- baobabKoodaa 1 year ago
- jeffbee 1 year agoWhich cases?
- betaby 1 year agoImpossible to know. But in my cases from any IP with low volume. I.e. I have a bunch of personal servers for 10+ years, there are rarely outgoing emails from them and google happily just black-hole emails from such low volume IPs.
- betaby 1 year ago
- jeroenhd 1 year ago
- nomilk 1 year ago
- pembrook 1 year agoEmail sending is a largely efficient market, and SES is the cheapest sender.
Thus, the SES IP pools have the worst IP reputations among all the SMTP-based senders. I would never use them (or an ESP that sends with them) in a million years.
The reason why cheap = bad in email is because Spammers have the lowest conversion rates of all senders (their emails are always untargeted), so price is their number 1 consideration.
You can cheap out elsewhere in your stack. But never cheap out on email — especially if you’re not sending high volume enough for a dedicated IP.
- albert_e 1 year agoThanks
I never had to use SES or really Email for that matter in my own architecture.
Since we get so immersed in best practices and recommendations of good architecture pushed by these very cloud providers (AWS, Azure, etc) -- this kind of candid information is usually not available unless we burn our fingers and learn through own experience.
I wish there was more efficient way of such practical knowledge to be shared among practitioners. Current discussion forums etc work to an extent but just hope there was much more effective way to spread awsreness.
- hdjjhhvvhga 1 year ago> best practices and recommendations of good architecture pushed by these very cloud providers
...are deliberately designed to mix several actual best pracices and a lot of marketing so that it's difficult to discern what is what.
- hdjjhhvvhga 1 year ago
- kureikain 1 year agoThis is bad advice.
SES is the best among the provider.
They treat spam very seriously, compare to other. You would need to maintain a baseline, failure to do so will get the account into soft-susspend or permanent suspended quickly.
AWS, being an engineering focus product, provider tooling and automated around bouncing, spam reporting handling. Having sophisicated tooling help user deal with that.
They strongly againtst and not suggest end-user to buy dedicated IP. Where as other providers always want user to pay more for "dedicated ip" to "get better delivery".
AWS has procedure, best practice to encounrage slowly warmup when sending mass volume. They had their own rate limit (14 messages per second by default), move the account out of sandbox, a good domain/sender verification.
They are the best among providers when it comes to email.
Sometimes they appear to be worst than others, but that is a specific case. The way email works will always have false positive. If user decided the email is spam(even it isn't) and keep reporting it may appear in a certain spam list.
- pembrook 1 year agoEvery SMTP service (Mailgun, Sendgrid, Postmark, etc.) does the same things AWS does to try to prevent spam and has the same features you mention (shared IPs to start, warmup on mass sending, developer tooling, etc.)
Email delivery is a commodity business at this point, hence why there's so many PE rollups in the space.
The fact of the matter is it only takes 1 bad send to end up on a blacklist, and SES is the cheapest so it will always be the most attractive target for spammers/fraudsters.
Am I correct that maybe you run a Saas built off SES and might have incentive to defend?
- kureikain 1 year agoI run a competitor of SES so I won't defend them.
But the problem is that Mailgun/Sendgrid/Postmark and the like is less senstive to spam and ban. The ban on SES is way heavier and the spam rule is stricer.
Maigun/Sendgrid even suggest to use dedicated IP pool to improve delivery, where as AWS SES doesn't https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/dg/dedicated-ip.htmlhttps://docs.sendgrid.com/ui/account-and-settings/dedicated-... You can see the tone there.
- kureikain 1 year ago
- pembrook 1 year ago
- manishsharan 1 year agoYou are assuming that SES allows for spammers. In my experience, SES has pretty good controls , limits and policies to dissuade from spamming.
- pembrook 1 year agoLiterally all ESPs and SMTP services have super strict anti-spam policies. The problem is it only takes 1 bad send to end up on a blacklist.
The cheapest service will always get the most attempts from spammers. You can try to detect them before they send, but the only way you know for sure that they're a spammer, is after they've already sent spam using your platform.
- jfengel 1 year agoI'm a bit surprised that the spammers even bother with it, since it costs money and the conversion rates are near zero. I had the impression that most spammers would rather take over hacked accounts -- not quite zero cost, but pretty low.
- jfengel 1 year ago
- pembrook 1 year ago
- nugget 1 year agoIf SES is the worst, who is the best? By implication, simply the most expensive providers?
- pembrook 1 year agoNot necessarily (although, hard to imagine there's even 1 spammer willing to spend $100,000/yr on some enterprisey crap like Salesforce Pardot or Marketo).
But I'd just go with whatever sender isn't the cheapest and has the founders still intimately involved in the product. Stopping spammers is ultimately still a human game. Postmark used to be my go-to, but they sold, and I'd bet my entire salary that within a few years that service will end up like all the others that have been bought-and-sold.
- pembrook 1 year ago
- albert_e 1 year ago
- slau 1 year agoIt sounds like you could benefit from having your own dedicated IP pool in SES.
- kunwon1 1 year agoAmazon SES is not a good choice for sending critical email notifications. Their 'global suppression list' [1] has caused no end of headaches for me and my clients.
If you and I are both using SES to send to the same person, and my message results in a hard bounce, then your messages to that person will start to silently fail.
[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/dg/sending-email-glob...
- johanneswu 1 year agoYou can now use a account-level suppression list to override the global suppression list though.
> If an address is on the global suppression list, but not on your account level suppression list (which means you want to send to it), and you do send to it, Amazon SES will still attempt delivery, but if it bounces, the bounce will affect your own reputation
[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/dg/lists-and-subscrip...
- kunwon1 1 year agoInteresting. I've worked with vendors (Including VMWare/Carbon Black) that told me they couldn't override the global list. Maybe the product is evolving to address these (past?) flaws
- kunwon1 1 year ago
- messutied 1 year agoWould you happen to know of better alternatives for sending critical email notifications? We're just now working on moving away from Mailgun into SES. This thread is making me reconsider.
- mprovost 1 year ago"Critical" and "email" don't generally go together.
- kunwon1 1 year agoTo echo the other reply, I don't rely on email for critical comms.
If I had to rely on email for critical comms, I would use a product that lets me see the SMTP logs, and alert on failures. I would have some backup provider that I could then quickly shift to
But I'm still an on-prem email administrator, so my entire paradigm is pretty much obsolete. I may not be the best source of info in this space
- mprovost 1 year ago
- johanneswu 1 year ago
- saradhi 1 year agoThanks you all for comments. I have made a decision to subscribed to dedicated IPs (credits: @slau).
The differentiating factor between our current AWS SES plan and the competitors (mentioned in the comments) is having a dedicated IP. With our current volume, none of the competitors are anyway near AWS SES costs. So, moving to a dedicated IPs thats cost 25$ extra not only solves our issue, but also no change in code/infrastructure.
- slau 1 year agoJust make sure you have sufficient traffic to warrant a dedicated IP. An unknown IP suddenly sending a burst of emails is going to get soft-blocked very quickly. You need to build up your reputation, and you need to slowly increase how much you send.
The managed IP is an option, although I’ve never used it.
When I was the VPoE at Dixa, we switched over to SES, and we had 3 dedicated IPs, and for our volume back then (a few thousand emails a day), this worked very well. I don’t know if they ever hit scaling issues after I left.
- slau 1 year ago
- ttul 1 year agoHey everyone, CEO of MailChannels here. I've been following this thread with interest, as we've also observed similar challenges in the email delivery space. Well, to be honest, the ground game is constantly changing in this space as everyone has scaled.
Email delivery is inherently complex due to the various factors that contribute to deliverability, including IP reputation, domain reputation, content filtering, and recipient engagement. Shared IP pools can indeed be challenging because of the "bad neighbor" effect, where one sender's bad behavior can affect the reputation of all senders using that IP.
However, shared pools can also prove advantageous because it's harder for a receiver to block your IP if tons of email comes from it from a wide variety of senders. Receivers are trying to reduce collateral damage while protecting their users from spam and phishing - this is literally the reward model feeding their machine learning models. If your email travels alongside millions of other emails that are mostly received well, that IP will not be blocked; whereas, if you send email from your own IP, it doesn't take much for a receiver to pull the trigger and block you since there is very little consequence other than blocking your traffic.
Not that anyone here asked, but if you want a "best practice", try multiple different services and approaches and find the one that works best for you. There is no perfect email sending service for all senders and as mentioned above, the ground game is changing all the time.
- LeonM 1 year agoThis is typically not a big deal, as explained in the message, it is a temporary countermeasure. It'll resolve itself as long as you really aren't spamming.
Though Gmail responds citing your IP, Gmail and all other large email services don't use IP filtering. Just about all email service providers use domain reputation, since IPs are ephemeral.
If you are sending transactional emails that your customers have agreed to, then your domain (!= ip) rating will improve over time and there will be less countermeasures, regardless of which IP you use to send.
> Is anyone facing the same issue with AWS? or similar issues with other bulk email service providers?
This is just Gmail doing it's thing (the right thing, in my opinion, contrary to most HN sentiment). It is independent of which sender you use.
> How do you deal with such issues in the future? Set up alternative email service providers.
Use DMARC reporting to verify that all your email is sent with DKIM alignment, to make sure that you aren't causing the problem. This is independent of email service provider.
But as explained, you are being rate limited, not blocked. Email will be delivered, it'll just take longer. You state that you have a 60-90 day margin for delivery, so I wouldn't worry about it too much.
> Is this the side effect of Gmail's dormant account deletion rolled out last week?
No.
- leetrout 1 year agoNot entirely true. There is a reason Mailchimp owns a rather large block of IP addresses.
- LeonM 1 year ago> Not entirely true
OK you are right, Gmail may use IP-based rating, but it only does that if there isn't sufficient proof (in form of DKIM signatures) that the email is sent on behalf of the domain. If the email is DKIM aligned, then domain rating is used. I just didn't want to go that far into detail in my post.
> There is a reason Mailchimp owns a rather large block of IP addresses.
The reason is mostly for supporting smaller/legacy/self-hosted email services that do rely on IP reputation. Since Mailchimp won't allow customers to bulk email unless they have DKIM set up correctly, they don't have to worry as much about IP spreading with the major email service providers.
- jeffbee 1 year agoI don't think this is accurate. Address reputation is an important signal regardless of DKIM.
- jeffbee 1 year ago
- LeonM 1 year ago
- leetrout 1 year ago
- joshstrange 1 year agoI'm currently using PostmarkApp (from before the acquisition) but I've looked longingly at SES for years. My traffic is very bursty and so ~8 months out of the year I pay the monthly cost and send 1-2 emails if that and then the other 3 months I send close to my plan max. I'd love to switch to a pay-per-use provider but stories like this scare me. I've already dealt with deliverability issues (iCloud randomly deciding that unless you can receive emails, have the MX records in place, they will block you. This was for transactional/login/notification emails), since email is the login method for my sites it's rather important that it works. To PostmarkApp's credit they helped me to track down why the emails were bouncing to iCloud, I doubt I would have gotten the same support from AWS (I'm too small of a fish).
I'd love to hear what other people are using to send transactional emails (no marketing). Ideally I'd find a provider that could "scale down to $0".
- baobabKoodaa 1 year agoIf you are not in the business of selling email delivery, you should be buying email delivery from a company who is in that business. It's extremely hard to get emails delivered and it's even harder for a small company. For your use case you could probably use Postmark and get good delivery with that.
- inopinatus 1 year agoUnfortunately Postmark was recently acquired by a so-called “campaign management” company and they have already started sending unsolicited commercial mail to unauthorised recipients, and when I pushed back and complained they became downright hostile and confrontational and told us to unsubscribe - from a marketing list that we hadn’t opted into, and that was operated via their new parent company. It was like a conversation from the dark ages of UCE where the spammer says “just opt out mate”. So Postmark are dead to me now.
- baobabKoodaa 1 year agoHoly crap! I had no idea. Do you mean they sent unsolicited commercial mail to registered users of Postmark, or do you mean they sent to email addresses they collected as part of their operations (emails that users of Postmark sent emails to)?
- inopinatus 1 year agoThe former, but not even the primary details of a registered account; they subscribed the emergency contact email addresses, which for us included one of my board members, who then contacted me saying “why am I getting this noise?”
It was neither an emergency nor a transactional message, making it exactly the kind of behaviour they don’t permit from their own customers. Doubling down with the instruction to unsubscribe oneself could only be interpreted as a “fuck you”, and coming from an email company claiming such a moral high ground as Postmark formerly occupied, a sensational own goal.
- inopinatus 1 year ago
- baobabKoodaa 1 year ago
- anamexis 1 year agoUsing SES is buying email delivery from a company who is in that business.
- killerpixler 1 year agoDisagree here. The sendgrid, mailchimp, postmark of the world are in the business of sending emails. They have their dedicated IPs and handle deliverability, anti spam, and whatnot with email providers like Gmail.
SES is an email sending infrastructure tool. That's not the same.
IMO equating SES with an email company is like saying home depot is a contractor because they sell hammers and lumber. It gives you the tools to be able to build stuff but it's not the same as a construction company.
- anamexis 1 year agoSES, like Mailchimp, Sendgrid, and Postmark, has dedicated IPs as a paid add-on.
- anamexis 1 year ago
- vbezhenar 1 year agoIf Amazon can't make it work, might just use good old postfix I guess.
My anecdotal evidence is that simple postfix setup with IP from a reputable hoster which is not blacklisted works perfectly. And it's actually pretty simple to configure postfix for sending mail (now configuring postfix + dovecot + auth + spam filtering is another story).
- mschuster91 1 year ago> If Amazon can't make it work, might just use good old postfix I guess.
AWS blocks TCP25 outbound by default [1].
[1] https://repost.aws/knowledge-center/ec2-port-25-throttle
- baobabKoodaa 1 year ago> My anecdotal evidence is that simple postfix setup with IP from a reputable hoster which is not blacklisted works perfectly.
And my anecdotal evidence is that it does not work perfectly: https://www.attejuvonen.fi/dont-send-email-from-your-own-ser...
- mschuster91 1 year ago
- killerpixler 1 year ago
- LinuxBender 1 year agoAs others mentioned they are using a paid AWS email service. In fairness however the price is very low thus making the bar to entry very low. They will have no shortage of customers that abuse the system, do not handle UCE reports and in some cases are outright spamming. The spammers may get blocked with time but there will be a continuous wake of damage in their path on the shared pools of IP addresses.
- LeonM 1 year ago> you should be buying email delivery from a company who is in that business.
OP is doing just that, Amazon SES = Simple Email Service
- pixl97 1 year agoThen OP should change services to a service that offers this as their primary mission objective.
If SES isn't delivering some stuff, Amazon will link to a page and say "here is why, good luck" and that's the end of the support ticket.
- baobabKoodaa 1 year ago> OP is doing just that, Amazon SES = Simple Email Service
If you look at AWS pages for SES, nowhere on their pages do they market email deliverability. That's not the service they sell.
- pixl97 1 year ago
- inopinatus 1 year ago
- topicseed 1 year agoI think this is a spammy neighbour problem on that sending IP. Might be you, might be someone else who's using SES. But whoever sends from this IP is penalised.
- ctas 1 year agoDo you have a custom return-path configured? Using a custom return path might help, because it ties your reputation primarily to your domain.
ESPs check multiple factors. Both IP and domain reputation play a role. They will check your return path / envelope sender domain reputation and your IP. Your domain will start with it's own reputation, but can be boosted with a good IP reputation. But if your domain had bad sending behaviour in the past, that might be an issue.
Source: I'm running a transactional mail service that solely works with shared IPs: https://www.markix.com.
- cuu508 1 year agoFYI: Your privacy policy is missing https://app.markix.com/privacy-policy
- cuu508 1 year ago
- johnklos 1 year agoAmazon is very, very spammy. If you want your email to be delivered and you don't want to end up sharing Amazon's reputation, you'll need to use another company for email delivery.
- vladvasiliu 1 year ago>>> Is this the side effect of Gmail's dormant account deletion rolled out last week?
IIRC, they haven't started to actually close the accounts just yet, so I doubt it's related.
- bdcravens 1 year agoWe are always trying to trim waste to stay lean, and the SES vs Sendgrid pricing looks nice on paper (we are on the Sendgrid Pro plan with the dedicated IP address, so it's $90/mo). However when I look at our Sendgrid stats (97% reputation; it's pretty much all transactional) I know it's worth well more than what we'd save.
- jeffbee 1 year agoWhy does a 4xx even come to your attention? Admittedly I never looked into what SES is or how it works, but I assumed it stores and forwards messages on behalf of its users, in which case a 4xx temporary failure to send should not come back to you.
- hstaab 1 year agoFor those recommending against SES for critical deliveries, what are you using?
In the recent past I’ve used Postmark, but they were acquired by a marketing company.
- erksa 1 year agoFor any critical email delivery make sure you can address this thing with the mailsender of choise:
1)SPF,
2)DKIM,
3)DMARC [2] (DMARC is often forgotten or can be super noisy when set up. Postmarc offers a aggregation service for free that sends you a weekly summary),
4)Dedicated IP
5)Reverse IP look up [1] (locate a dns PTR record for that IP address) should match the sender.
Not everyone supports 5).
4 and 5 is what you end up paying for, but totally worth it. Sendgrid, SES, Mailgun etc.
[1] https://www.mailgun.com/blog/deliverability/reverse-dns-whit...
- joshstrange 1 year agoAnd 1 surprising thing (to me) is some places (iCloud was what bit me) alway want you to be able to receive email (have MX records). Even though I have no need to support incoming emails iCloud was blocking my sending until I got that setup. The incoming emails just go to a black hole but that's enough.
- joshstrange 1 year ago
- ctas 1 year agoShameless plug: I've recently started my own transactional email service (https://www.markix.com), primarily targeting small senders, after having been a very happy Postmark customer for a long time. Our service is still in closed beta but delivering live emails.
I run a couple other businesses and moved all of my transactional email sending over to Markix.
Would love to have a chat with anyone that might be starting a new project and is open to try out a new mail service (mail in bio).
- erksa 1 year ago
- the_common_man 1 year agoFunny because Gmail is the biggest source of spam
- pixl97 1 year agoGmail is also one of the biggest email providers... it's almost like there is a correlation.
- pixl97 1 year ago
- 1 year ago
- gog 1 year ago[flagged]
- 0ct4via 1 year agoWhat an insightful and intelligent comment, that contributes incredible wealth to the current discourse, and doesn't minimize the seriousness of cancer at all - not.
"Omit internet tropes" is pretty clear in the guidelines, and failing to make any kind of intelligent or reasoned argument adds nothing to the conversation here. Do better.
- gog 1 year agoI agree that my comment was not constructive, frustration got the better of me, I will work on that. You might want to look into your abrasive/patronizing tone used to deliver that message.
Also, I don't agree that comparing Gmail to cancer is minimizing the seriousness of cancer, maybe you are just not seeing the damage to email as a decentralized platform Gmail is doing.
- 0ct4via 1 year agoBold assumption of you, assuming a "patronizing tone" and what I am or aren't seeing -- by that logic, it would seem you "are just not seeing the damage cancer does" given your ridiculous comparison.
Would you cry the same if Hotmail were the predominant platform?
Regardless of that, it still wasn't constructive, and your "you might want to x" and "you're not seeing y" comments are much more patronizing than anything else - maybe consider not projecting so hard next time.
- 1 year ago
- 0ct4via 1 year ago
- gog 1 year ago
- 0ct4via 1 year ago
- ds 1 year agoI tried to use cloudflare email routing and had the same issue. I simply set it up so any email to @mydomain.com would forward to a gmail.
The worst is that cloudflare did not let me know this was happening until I saw I was missing some emails and went hunting. About 20% of my emails would just get rejected silently with "delivery failed" in the logs. I wouldnt blame cloudflare so much if they kept attempting to redeliver, but they did not. They simply give up.