Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 266 posts

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#151

Post by cddotdotslash »

tuldia wrote: post #139
cddotdotslash wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not a single post on Hacker News can use the term "serverless" without the exact same replies being posted every time. It's as if a certain portion of the HN crowd simply cannot fathom that a new term exists and is in use, and instead resort to the same, tired responses.

Seems that you edit your comment quite a bit, eh? --- > Not a single post on Hacker News can use the term "serverless" without the exact same replies being posted every time. Indeed. > It's as if a certain portion of the HN crowd simply cannot fathom that a new term exists and is in use, and instead resort to the same, tired responses. If was only "a certain portion/crowd" it will have no responses at all. I see more…

First, no, I haven't edited the post. Second, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say, you may need... to edit your post and try again.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#152

Post by wiradikusuma »

Cyph0n wrote: post #138

I’ve been working on a small side project that involves processing incoming email. In particular, it’s an app that needs to do something for each email it receives from (hopefully paying!) users. I am not interested in storing user mail, so SES is just too costly, at least according to a quick worst-case calculation. That leaves me with two options: 1. Self-hosted Postfix 2. Mail service like Mailgun With (1), there…

I thought SES is the cheapest of all since it's the lowest level? (Compared to Mailgun etc)

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#153

Post by tuldia »

Cyph0n wrote: post #138

I’ve been working on a small side project that involves processing incoming email. In particular, it’s an app that needs to do something for each email it receives from (hopefully paying!) users. I am not interested in storing user mail, so SES is just too costly, at least according to a quick worst-case calculation. That leaves me with two options: 1. Self-hosted Postfix 2. Mail service like Mailgun With (1), there…

> I’ve been working on a small side project that involves processing incoming email. In particular, it’s an app that needs to do something for each email it receives from (hopefully paying!) users.

I wish you all the best! Mind if I ask for the link?

> With (1), there is no need to worry about overages, but scaling the mail server might be challenging.

Honestly, quite the opposite.

1. Duplicate your MX box.

2. Duplicate your MX record.

That is it :)

> I am writing the mail processing daemon ... in Rust...

You might like to take a look in https://github.com/mailman/mailman for ideas/inspiration. It's a great tool for processing emails too, but cannot deny I'm now curious to see how one in rust will look like.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#154

Post by giu »

statictype wrote: post #145
giu wrote: post #131

Just a friendly reminder, since I've worked with SES in the past: Don't forget about bounces when using SES [0]. From [0]: > If your bounce rate is 5% or greater, we'll place your account under review. To sum it up, try to keep track of bounced e-mails by using the SES notifications [1]. [0] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/DeveloperGuide/e-faq.... [1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/DeveloperGuide/monit…

We accidentally had ses credentials set up on our QA server and quickly got banned for sending too many sdf@sdf.com emails. Took quite some time to get it unbanned. Since then we switched to Mailgun for email delivery but ses is still useful for processing incoming email via Lambda

Very good point about sending test e-mails, which also reminds me of the next friendly reminder: SES has a Mailbox Simulator [0] where you can send e-mails to specific e-mail addresses and check the notifications you receive, e.g., bounces.

If you're using the SNS notifications [1], these notifications will be JSON objects [2]; you can then use a notification to extract the information needed, e.g. a bouncing e-mail address to be stored in a local registry in case of a bounce notification.

[0] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/DeveloperGuide/mailbo...

[1] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/DeveloperGuide/notifi...

[2] https://docs.aws.amazon.com/ses/latest/DeveloperGuide/notifi...

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#155

Post by rumanator »

scarface74 wrote: post #150
rumanator wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You either completely missed the point or you are too invested in going off on a tangent to try to change the subject. The $100 vs $10 was not intended to argument the merit of $10 savings: it refutes the absurd claim that $100 expenditures justifies adopting a convoluted architecture, because the fact is not adopting a convoluted architecture is actually much cheaper. Additionally, somehow you've brushed aside the f…

Your “proof” is an anecdote that was easily disproven by a link. If it takes your developers two weeks to host an API in a Lambda when I showed you a link on how simple it is. It says more about your developers than AWS. My time is far from cheap and any time that we can spend letting someone else do the grunt work is valuable.

> Your “proof” is an anecdote that was easily disproven by a link.

Real-world problems don't go away when you try to brush them aside. You either face the facts or remain in fantasy land.

> If it takes your developers two weeks to host an API in a Lambda

Please don't put words in other people's mouths. You have absolutely no idea about what the problems were and already made it quite clear that you don't care about facts or reality, and simply prefer to fabricate accusations to avoid discussing technical issues. That speaks volumes about your own competence and technical ability.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#156

Post by Cyph0n »

wiradikusuma wrote: post #152
Cyph0n wrote: post #138

I’ve been working on a small side project that involves processing incoming email. In particular, it’s an app that needs to do something for each email it receives from (hopefully paying!) users. I am not interested in storing user mail, so SES is just too costly, at least according to a quick worst-case calculation. That leaves me with two options: 1. Self-hosted Postfix 2. Mail service like Mailgun With (1), there…

I thought SES is the cheapest of all since it's the lowest level? (Compared to Mailgun etc)

No, especially if you’re expecting emails with large attachments.

SES charges $0.09 per 1000 mail “chunks”, where a chunk is 256 Kb of data. This is on top of the base SES fee and S3 operation and storage fees.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#157

Post by Normal_gaussian »

arno1 wrote: post #42
anonu wrote: post #35

Now someone just needs to create a serverless (aka client side or browser only) Gmail like interface you can host on S3. And the shackles will be broken...

https://www.rainloop.net ? Anyway, what is the point in moving from one Giant to another Giant? :-) Unless it saves the cost, I don't see the benefit of such hassle.

Most serverless offerings are somewhat compatible with a pitcher of greasing. It would be a doable exercise to duplicate this codebase for a few other platforms.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#158

Post by jijji »

arno1 wrote: post #12

> This stack was created out of frustration due to the fact that to this day there's no easy way to have a full email server without the overhead of installing and configuring all servers needed to handle incoming and outgoing messages. Interesting approach, though I solved this frustration by the use of a Docker and kept "my data is mine" + "no vendor lock-in" + "I control all the gears" approach. (Though, it's not…

complex but not to mention expensive. i wonder what the costs per month would be sending/receiving a relatively small workload per day (1000 messages) doing it with SES and S3 versus a cheap vps provider.

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#159

Post by Cyph0n »

tuldia wrote: post #153
Cyph0n wrote: post #138

I’ve been working on a small side project that involves processing incoming email. In particular, it’s an app that needs to do something for each email it receives from (hopefully paying!) users. I am not interested in storing user mail, so SES is just too costly, at least according to a quick worst-case calculation. That leaves me with two options: 1. Self-hosted Postfix 2. Mail service like Mailgun With (1), there…

> I’ve been working on a small side project that involves processing incoming email. In particular, it’s an app that needs to do something for each email it receives from (hopefully paying!) users. I wish you all the best! Mind if I ask for the link? > With (1), there is no need to worry about overages, but scaling the mail server might be challenging. Honestly, quite the opposite. 1. Duplicate your MX box. 2. Duplic…

Thanks! No link yet, but there is a messy GH repo: https://github.com/aksiksi/vaulty

Yes, I only learned about MX record priorities last night haha. With Postfix, the most straightforward way to run code on receiving an email seems to be through a pipe filter. Running multiple filter processes probably requires a beefy server.

Thanks for that link! I might just use a similar approach to allow users to configure how to receive emails (HTTP or stdin, etc.).

Re: A serverless email server on AWS using S3 and SES

#160

Post by scarface74 »

rumanator wrote: post #148
scarface74 wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no “overreaching area”. Amazon Aurora falls under RDS along with all of their other database offerings. No one on HN would accept an argument that technology is “confusing” that the poster didn’t take time to learn unless it involves AWS.

> There is no “overreaching area”. Amazon Aurora falls under RDS along with all of their other database offerings. You mean AWS Aurora serverless? https://aws.amazon.com/rds/aurora/serverless/ You're underlining the failing of buzzword-driven development. > No one on HN would accept an argument that technology is “confusing” Good. No one other than yourself ever made the mistake of doing so. If you have a hard time a…

Yes Aurora Serverless is a distinct offering. Regular Aurora you have a certain server of a certain size. Aurora Serverless autoscales - just like lambda.
Post reply on HN