Viktor, you're now discussing the viability of the business model. But, just because you wouldn't attempt it, it doesn't meant that others wouldn't.
The point was that SNI makes this particular business model possible. That's all. Is it possible that you will accept that one point so that we can perhaps discuss something more productive? You don't have to like (the use case)! There's probably a ton of small ISPs who might actually be interested in doing exactly something like this. At least here in the UK, when you get an Internet connection you also get a bunch of email addresses. Lots of ISPs are near-virtual too. With my business hat on, I'd love to outsource anything that I have no interest in, and that's never going to be my core competency. Email is a commodity. With it taken care of, I can focus on what's going to differentiate me from others. On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 8:11 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-d...@dukhovni.org> wrote: > > > > On Oct 24, 2017, at 2:57 PM, Ivan Ristic <ivan.ris...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 24, 2017 at 7:47 PM, Viktor Dukhovni <ietf-d...@dukhovni.org> > wrote: > > > >> An MTA is far more heavy-weight infrastructure component than > >> a website. Sure you can start a Web business on someone else's > >> shared platform, but running email hosting on someone else's > >> virtually hosted MTA is entirely unrealistic. > >> > >> MTAs both send and receive email, they run complex anti-spam > >> and anti-virus filters, they are integrated with mailbox > >> stores, they have IP reputations as sending systems, they > >> do DKIM signing, add Authentication-Results headers, store > >> and forward email, ... > >> > > That's exactly why it's a great candidate for outsourcing. I will let > > someone else do all of that techie stuff, and I'll focus on growing the > > business. > > Hosting email is *all that techie stuff*. Email is infrastructure. > There's little else you offer by rebranding someone else's > infrastructure. They can just sell the service directly and cut > out the unnecessary middle-man. > > One might try to offer enhanced security, like say protonmail.ch, > but that's not possible on a shared platform... Otherwise, email > is a commodity. > > >> Mere SNI will not come remotely close to giving you a virtual > >> MTA. An MTA is NOT a website. > > > > No, SNI will give me freedom to migrate my stuff if I want to. > > If I can't do that, I have no long-term business. > > In any case this business model is already dead in the water > given the market dominance of the existing hosting players, > who don't have to pay a third party for infrastructure. > > An MTA requires a dedicated IP outbound to avoid reputation > damage from co-hosted miscreant third-parties. Once you have > that, you may as well have a dedicated inbound IP and the need > for virtual hosting goes away. > > Let's get back to hearing actual, not straw-man use-cases... > > -- > Viktor. > > _______________________________________________ > Uta mailing list > Uta@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta > -- Ivan
_______________________________________________ Uta mailing list Uta@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/uta
