Confusing the engineers

We went camping last weekend with a bunch of friends. Had a great time relaxing on the banks of the Tuolumne River, eating way too much and visiting.
On Saturday I was wearing a somewhat geeky t-shirt. It said 554: abort mission. (Thank you MessageSystems). At some point on Saturday every engineer came up to me, read my shirt and then looked at me and said “That’s not HTTP.”
That lead to various discussions about how their junior engineers don’t actually know SMTP at all. Why? Because the SMTP libraries just work. Apparently the HTTP libraries aren’t that great, so folks have to learn more about HTTP to troubleshoot and use them.
I’m sure there’s a joke in there somewhere: A Kindle engineer, an Android engineer and a robot engineer walk into a campsite…
EmailFilters_boxes_forblogIt did leave me thinking, though, about how it’s not that easy to run your own mail server these days. Gone are the days when running your own server was cost effective and easy. These days, there is just too much spam coming in. Crafting filters is a skilled job. It’s not that hard to run good filters. But to run good filters takes time to do well.
There are also a lot of challenges to sending mail. One of the discussions I had at the campsite was how hard it was to configure outbound mail. The engineer was helping a friend set up a website and trying to get the website to send notifications to the friend. But without setting up authentication the mail kept silently failing.
Of course, we do run our own mail server. But it’s our job and, in many ways, it keeps us honest. We don’t run many filters meaning we see what spammers are doing and can use our own experiences to better understand what commercial filters are dealing with.
For most people, though, I really think using a service is the right solution. Find one with filters that meet your needs and just pay them to deal with the headache.
 

Lost in the mists of time
Ethics in Internet Operations

Related Posts

Do system administrators have too much power?

Yesterday, Laura brought a thread from last week to my attention, and the old-school ISP admin and mail geek in me felt the need to jump up and say something in response to Paul’s comment. My text here is all my own, and is based upon personal experience as well as those of my friends. That said, I’m not speaking on their behalf, either. 🙂
I found Paul’s use of the word ‘SysAdmin’ to be a mighty wide (and — in my experience — probably incorrect) brush to be painting with, particularly when referring to operations at ISPs with any significant number of mailboxes. My fundamental opposition to use of the term comes down to this: It’s no longer 1998.
The sort of rogue (or perhaps ‘maverick’) behavior to which you refer absolutely used to be a thing, back when a clean 56k dial-up connection was the stuff of dreams and any ISP that had gone through the trouble to figure out how to get past the 64k user limit in the UNIX password file was considered both large and technically competent. Outside of a few edge cases, I don’t know many system administrators these days who are able to (whether by policy or by access controls) — much less want to — make such unilateral deliverability decisions.
While specialization may be for insects, it’s also inevitable whenever a system grows past a certain point. When I started in the field, there were entire ISPs that were one-man shows (at least on the technical side). This simply doesn’t scale. Eventually, you start breaking things up into departments, then into services, then teams assigned to services, then parts of services assigned to teams, and back up the other side of the mountain, until you end up with a whole department whose job it is to run one component of one service.
For instance, let’s take inbound (just inbound) email. It’s not uncommon for a large ISP to have several technical teams responsible for the processing of mail being sent to their users:

Read More

Check your tech

One of the things we do for just about every new client coming into WttW is have them send us an email from their bulk mail system. We then check it for technical correctness. This includes things like reviewing all the different From headers, rDNS of the connecting IP, List-Unsubscribe headers and authentication. This is always useful, IMO, because we often find things that were right when they were set up, but due to other changes at the customer they’re not 100% correct any more.
This happens to most of us. Even a company as small as Word to the Wise misses a rDNS update here or a hostname change update there when making infrastructure changes. That’s even when the same people know about email and are responsible for the infrastructure.
One of the most common problems we see is a SPF record that has accumulated include: files from previous providers. There are a couple reasons for this. One is the fact that SPF is set up while still at the old provider in anticipation of moving to the new provider. Once the move is made no one goes back to clean up the SPF record and remove the old entries. The other reason is that a lot of tech folks don’t like to delete things. Deleting things can lead to problems, and there’s no harm in a little extra in the SPF record. Except, eventually, there are so many include files that the lookup fails.
Every mailer should schedule a regular tech audit for their mail. Things change and sometimes in the midst of chance we don’t always catch some of the little details.

Read More

Filtering more than spam

The obvious application of machine learning for email is to send spam to the junk/bulk folder. Most services use some level of machine learning for filters. Places like Gmail have extensive machine learning filters to filter spam and unwanted mail away from their users.
Some organizations are taking the filtering process a step further. Almost every mail client more advanced than PINE has the ability for users to create rules to sort mail into folders.  Late last year, Office 365 rolled out a feature, Clutter that tracks how a user interacts with mail and filters unimportant mail. This allows each user to have their own filters, but without the overhead of having to create the filters.
The Clutter engine looks at both how the user interacts with mail and things it knows about the organization. For example, if Exchange is tied into Active Directory, then mail from a manager will be prioritized while mail from a co-worker may end up in the clutter folder.
Email is a critical business tool. A significant number of companies rely on email for internal and external communication. Many users treat their inbox as a todo list, prioritizing what they work on based on what’s in their mail box. Despite the needs of users, the mail client hasn’t really changed.
Over the last few years, we’ve seen different online services attempt to build a more effective email client. Some of these features were things like tabs and priority inbox at Gmail. Microsoft created the “sweep” feature for Outlook/Hotmail users to manage inbox clutter. Third parties have created services to try and improve the mailbox experience for their users. 
Many of the email filters, up to this point, have really been focused on protecting users from spam and malicious emails. Applying that filtering knowledge to more than just spam, but to the different kinds of emails makes sense to me. I’ve always had a fairly extensive set of filters, initially procmail but now sieve, to process and organize incoming mail. But I kinda like the idea that my mail client learns how I filter messages and do the right thing on its own.
I’d love to see some improvements in the mail client, that make it easier to manage and organize incoming email. It remains to be seen if this is a feature that takes off and makes its way to other clients or not.
 
 

Read More