declassed art via Dng <dng@???> wrote:

> I do have an unconfigured PTR for a couple of reasons, one of those is lack of static IP for now.

I figured out quite quickly that checking reverse DNS is a waste of time - too many systems, even those run by professional network/server engineers, are just badly configured.



Gregory Nowak via Dng <dng@???> wrote:

> I have toyed more than once with the question of what would happen if
> a group of us running our own mail exchanges made the choice to
> reject mail from gmail.com with a 550? If a few of us did it, we might
> miss mail we maybe wanted to get. If a bunch of us did it, then a
> bunch of gmail users would complain to google. My guess is google's
> response would be "this is a free service; if it doesn't work for you,
> then don't use it.”

No, I’ll tell you what Google’s response will be :
“Our system is working fine, the other system is broken”.
Don’t forget that this is a company that is quite happy to simply change the rules on the basis that it’s big enough that the rest of the world will adapt. Look at the history of stuff they’ve “just changed” because it suits them. Sticking with email, they were one of the first to implement SPF fully knowing that it would break most mailing lists and mail forwarders around the world - and so most mailing lists around the world had to update software & change setups to suit Google’s* new set of “how email is to work” rules. I know, I had a customer facing mail server** and mailing list server.

* OK, they weren’t the only ones, but they were one of the first.

In the network world, Android devices don’t work on managed networks using DHCPv6 for address assignment. For idealogical reasons, they don’t support DHCPv6 and even actively block third party support (by pressuring chipset manufacturers to block the packets in the hardware). I could be flippant and suggest it’s because they see it as their job to snoop on people and using DHCP allows network admins to do that, but it’s mostly because they are interested only in mobile applications and refuse to consider the needs of any other environment (even where it’s a legal requirement).

In the web world they are pushing for “SSL or it doesn’t exist” despite the fact that it does actually cost money** to add SSL and there are situations (such as supporting older hardware) where there is no SSL and never will be.
And of course, there’s the shenanigans with QUIK and DoH ...

So basically, Google’s attitude is that if some other system doesn’t work with their offering - then it’s the other system that’s broken. And they are big enough that they can get away with that, especially when they are able to tell users who complain that that’s the case.

** When SPF started getting applied, clients started seeing problems.
Ideally we’d have them set up an account in their mail client to get mail from our server using IMAP, but many customers would refuse to do that - “I want my mail in my inbox”. Trying to explain why that’s not a good idea is an exercise in futility. So once their ISP is checking SFP, they no longer get any emails from sources setting SPF - and it’s our fault that the client insists on doing the broken way.
Instead, they’d say it’s because out mail server is faulty - because that’s what their ISP (usually using an ISP mail account) told them and apparently the hell desks at the big ISPs are more honest that a small IT services company where they can be on first name terms with the staff.


Simon