You don’t see a problem with this?
I think the real problem is that we are delegating to google the arbitrary decision of what is spam or not. Given that their core business in great part relies on syphoning info from users' mails, they have zero incentive to let users host their own servers and potentially bypass that data collection, and an actual incemtive to block as many domains as they can, for the sake of "safety"
The problem seems to be that Google does not even keep a reputation for my extremely low volume mail server, and the solution might be to set up automated emailing a couple of @gmail inboxes and marking-as-not-spam all of them there.
Even that wouldn't be full-time work.
Interesting. Care to elaborate on what makes self-hosting email such a time-consuming task? Most of the replies you're getting seem to suggest it's not that hard to pull off.
Care to elaborate? We already had other comments stating it's not a problem. I would love to hear some first-hand accounts substantiating these claims.
Currently sendmail and dovecot on a (off-grid) RPi that I use for a bunch of other services too.
A huge hassle, in fact. Even with robust exchangers, like Postix, and careful all around hardening, you are going to get a fight of your life.
Meanwhile a bunch of other people are saying 'despite many people here reporting issues, once I got the software installed, it works fine for me'
Really makes you think
I mean, my working theory here is that it's easy to get whitelisted - in fact you'll probably be whitelisted by default if you have working DMARC and DKIM etc - but companies who operate large mail installations also operate AI 'agents' that aim to drive traffic and users towards their service. That includes spreading negative sentiment i.e. convincing users on forums that setting up their own mailserver is an impossible task and that they'll never be able to achieve delivery etc.
Of course I could be wrong.
Meanwhile, if you use it for marketing or something, I think more things can go wrong.