From 858cd3e2a1d3256213142c8282b1127900e89647 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Dominic Ricottone Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2023 21:22:23 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] Added post --- content/posts/rip_email_server.md | 94 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 94 insertions(+) create mode 100644 content/posts/rip_email_server.md diff --git a/content/posts/rip_email_server.md b/content/posts/rip_email_server.md new file mode 100644 index 0000000..a4428f6 --- /dev/null +++ b/content/posts/rip_email_server.md @@ -0,0 +1,94 @@ +--- +title: RIP Email Server +date: "2023-11-13T19:54:09+00:00" +draft: false +--- + +RIP my email server, +[2023](/posts/2023/06/disruption-from-google-and-red-hat/) - 2023 + +As you may have heard, Amazon wil soon begin charging an hourly rate for +public IPv4 addresses. +*Fair enough*, you may say, *it is a scarse resource*. +It isn't $42/year scarse. +I categorically refuse this highway robbery. + +So, it seems I am embarking on a journey to the strange lands of IPv6. +A forthcoming blog post will discuss this in more detail. +In the meantime, there's a more pressing issue. + +The only reason I've been able to run my email server is the permanent IP +address afforded to me by AWS Elastic IP (EIP). +I am otherwise stranded in the Midwestern world of awful ISPs that will +never sell me a static IP. +*Why does that matter?* +Even if I gave up on the dream of *sending* mail from a self-hosted server, +it isn't possible to even *receive* mail unless you have a PTR record +published. +Google's mail server +*(the only one that matters, as far as I'm concerned)* +will *not* talk to your server if your domain name and IP address fail the +roundtrip MX -> A -> PTR -> A lookup. + +And it isn't just the static IPv4 addresses that are going to become a paid +feature. +No, this isn't as simple as 'the party being over' for everyone's single free +static address. +Even a *dynamically assigned* IPv4 address will incur the charge. +The only way around this is to convert your stack for IPv6. + +*Experts have been saying for years that we need to adopt IPv6. +For decades even. +Time's up.* +Sure, and I'm fine with that. +I'll eat the cost of my own stubborness. +But losing the PTR record means I have to shut down my mail server. + +*Surely AWS supports IPv6 PTR records* you may protest. +No. +*Why?* +Great question. + +---- + +*Warning: pure speculation fueled by dissatisfaction ahead.* + +I don't think Amazon is trying to push customers onto their full-service mail +hosting offerings. +If they cared to turn a profit on those, +they'd invest just a bit of money into that engineering team to make the +product at least a little functional. +Also, I don't think enough people put mail servers on AWS to make a significant +impact in that direction. + +I don't think that the cost of IPv4 addresses is actually high enough to +*require* charging for them. +Maybe this is a strategic pricing position? +Establish a price that will scare away non-corporate users early. +So that when costs *are* prohibitive, +and competitors are forced to introduce similar charges, +AWS can boast of 'cheaper' prices. + +Maybe someone at Amazon is trying to force a mass migration to IPv6. +Could be a principled thing, +or maybe there is some way to profit off of IPv6 addressing. +I honestly can't imagine it, but behind every bad idea is a crypto bro with an +inflated job title. + +I don't know too much about how Amazon's networking looks, +but maybe this is as simple as EIP's overhead? +EIP is a very powerful tool, +especially for large organization that have fleets of EC2 instances. +But maybe all that indirection makes for an unsustainable network? + +---- + +I don't really know what the reasoning is, but it sucks. +I had a lot of TODO projects floating around that were going to build off of +this mail server. +I devoted a lot of time to figuring out how SMTP worked in theory, +and how it worked in practice, +and trying to defend my system from webcrawlers. +I'm sad to see it go. +RIP. + -- 2.43.4