51–60 of 217 posts
It works fine for transactional mail and most newsletters, but quite a few users expect to be email larger files than that.
Reading it I get that AWS now by default restricts email by - 200 mails per day max. 1 per second. - Can only send mail to verified addresses. Not sure how they verify though. - Can only send mail from the domain you own and verified. All these are good steps. Guess that will gradually take AWS IPs out of all those mail blacklists. And while we are on the topic, I find IP based mail blacklist services such as BRBL ob…
IPs are still a precious commodity, hence the threat of being listed by a high quality blocklist like Spamhaus provides an effective degree of encouragement for senders to clean up their act. Domain blocklists also exist, but the stick isn’t as sharp, because domains are a dime a dozen.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding of it has been "look, I reinvented cgi-bin."
Is cgi-bin highly available and will someone else have to wake up at night if it crashes?
A cgi-bin is as highly available as the web infrastructure hosting it, which as the cgi-bin author you don't need to know anything about.
A cgi-bin cannot "crash" because there is nothing long-running to crash. It is only run on demand.
I think it is easy to make the case that CGI was the proto-serverless api and that the serverless offerings we have today are an evolution of the CGI approach.
edit: typos
(Cos I use AWS DNS and don’t have the ability to forward like I do in name cheap)
A serverless server? It is a great illustration of how the term "serverless" has shifted from literally no server (ex: sqlite database) to "somebody else's computer".
> serverless server? This isn’t a contradiction. “Server” is an overloaded term and the “server” in “serverless” refers to a different meaning of “server” than the “email server” bit. “Serverless” means there is no physical or virtual hosts to manage, you just supply the request handler i.e., the email server . It's amusing because it sounds like a contradiction, but it's not one.
What a year to be alive ...
A serverless server? It is a great illustration of how the term "serverless" has shifted from literally no server (ex: sqlite database) to "somebody else's computer".
I also don't know how much of this is unethical behaviour by the big email providers, forcing you to sign up for their cloud email solution instead of doing your own.
It sure would be nice to be able to run one's own email server without having to stress over whether the recipient got your email.
One micro instance with Postfix is more than enough and can beat this setup not only in performance but in simplicity. What a year to be alive ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is cgi-bin highly available and will someone else have to wake up at night if it crashes?
Yes and no, respectively. A cgi-bin is as highly available as the web infrastructure hosting it, which as the cgi-bin author you don't need to know anything about. A cgi-bin cannot "crash" because there is nothing long-running to crash. It is only run on demand. I think it is easy to make the case that CGI was the proto-serverless api and that the serverless offerings we have today are an evolution of the CGI approac…