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

Plunk: The open source email platform

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 91 posts

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#61

Post by driaug »

rodolphoarruda wrote: post #16
prmoustache wrote: post #7

> built on top of AWS SES. [...] can be considered as a self-hosted alternative to services Someone doesn't really understand self-hosting.

The last time I tried to use Sendy with SES I received a NNN from AWS after I stating I would be using it for email marketing (MailChimp alternative). It seems that my "self-hosting" idea was cancelled by a 3rd party.

Most likely you did not answer the questions that are most important to them.

- How will you make sure that only subscribed recipients will get your emails - How will you handle bounces and complaints - How will you monitor your sending

Don't beat around the bush and you will be approved in less than 1 day.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#62

Post by fragmede »

mervz wrote: post #47
prmoustache wrote: post #7

> built on top of AWS SES. [...] can be considered as a self-hosted alternative to services Someone doesn't really understand self-hosting.

So if an application uses a 3rd party provider for authentication (Google, Github, etc) is this no longer considered "self-hosted", despite it running on user's hardware? I'm curious to know where you draw your imaginary line.

if we look at the philosophy behind self-hosting - to be able to host it ourselves, aka not rely on an external party for hosting, that means that if an external party is down or otherwise unavailable, then that line becomes fairly apparent. If 3rd party auth is required, then it's not really self-hosting then is it, because if that third party is down and the software can't be used, then that philosophy is violated. if it's optional, then that's fine though.

For something to be considered self-hosted, If the bombs drop and civilization is over and me, and my home lab are the only survivors, can I still use that software? I'd probably have other concerns in that case, like how am I going to survive nuclear winter, but that's where the imaginary line is.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#63

Post by defrost »

fragmede wrote: post #62
mervz wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if an application uses a 3rd party provider for authentication (Google, Github, etc) is this no longer considered "self-hosted", despite it running on user's hardware? I'm curious to know where you draw your imaginary line.

if we look at the philosophy behind self-hosting - to be able to host it ourselves, aka not rely on an external party for hosting, that means that if an external party is down or otherwise unavailable, then that line becomes fairly apparent. If 3rd party auth is required, then it's not really self-hosting then is it, because if that third party is down and the software can't be used, then that philosophy is violated.…

That certainly rules out all chat, email, and peer to peer software.

Other than that, what's your power supply like?

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#64

Post by fragmede »

defrost wrote: post #63
fragmede wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if we look at the philosophy behind self-hosting - to be able to host it ourselves, aka not rely on an external party for hosting, that means that if an external party is down or otherwise unavailable, then that line becomes fairly apparent. If 3rd party auth is required, then it's not really self-hosting then is it, because if that third party is down and the software can't be used, then that philosophy is violated.…

That certainly rules out all chat, email, and peer to peer software. Other than that, what's your power supply like?

how so? ircd will keep running just fine on my server, as well as exim and dovecot for email. external Name resolution would be an issue, but I can run internal DNS for the other survivors that join my network.

edit: prmoustache understood your comment better than i did.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#65

Post by defrost »

fragmede wrote: post #64
defrost wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That certainly rules out all chat, email, and peer to peer software. Other than that, what's your power supply like?

how so? ircd will keep running just fine on my server, as well as exim and dovecot for email. external Name resolution would be an issue, but I can run internal DNS for the other survivors that join my network. edit: prmoustache understood your comment better than i did.

If an IRC deamon runs on the only server left in the world .. what's the point? Who's going to log in?

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#66

Post by prmoustache »

defrost wrote: post #63
fragmede wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

if we look at the philosophy behind self-hosting - to be able to host it ourselves, aka not rely on an external party for hosting, that means that if an external party is down or otherwise unavailable, then that line becomes fairly apparent. If 3rd party auth is required, then it's not really self-hosting then is it, because if that third party is down and the software can't be used, then that philosophy is violated.…

That certainly rules out all chat, email, and peer to peer software. Other than that, what's your power supply like?

I think you are mistaking interoperability with a network with dependency with a propietary service from a specific vendor. These are different things.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#67

Post by v3ss0n »

jdpedrie wrote: post #27
v3ss0n wrote: post #5

Why on top of SES? why not SMTP?

Because if you send marketing emails through SMTP, your delivery rate will be approximately 0.00%, or if you're leveraging a third party SMTP, they will ban you.

Very good point.Thats the most painful point in selfhosting email .

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#68

Post by fragmede »

defrost wrote: post #65
fragmede wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

how so? ircd will keep running just fine on my server, as well as exim and dovecot for email. external Name resolution would be an issue, but I can run internal DNS for the other survivors that join my network. edit: prmoustache understood your comment better than i did.

If an IRC deamon runs on the only server left in the world .. what's the point? Who's going to log in?

the question was if it is self hosting or not, and eg slack and discord are not. so regardless of how many humans are still alive to use it, on the only server still running, the survivors could use something self hosting whereas they could not use one that required a system that was down.

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#69

Post by [deleted] »

prmoustache wrote: post #66
defrost wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That certainly rules out all chat, email, and peer to peer software. Other than that, what's your power supply like?

I think you are mistaking interoperability with a network with dependency with a propietary service from a specific vendor. These are different things.

[deleted]

Re: Plunk: The open source email platform

#70

Post by prmoustache »

jdpedrie wrote: post #27
v3ss0n wrote: post #5

Why on top of SES? why not SMTP?

Because if you send marketing emails through SMTP, your delivery rate will be approximately 0.00%, or if you're leveraging a third party SMTP, they will ban you.

> or if you're leveraging a third party SMTP, they will ban you.

Not if you are paying them for the service.

There are ommercial email services that aren't google/microsoft/aws. My former company used to use one (can't remember the name) that provided you with smtp servers and a set of dedicated IPs per customers that were preused by them to build a good reputation beforehand.

I think the point is not necessary that you have to selfhost email (although it can be done, some people do), but depending on a single vendor through a proprietary service/API.

Post reply on HN