[fosron]

Worked on an ESP. We had a couple of server software we used on low-level for sending. None of them would accept the message without a Message-ID. But even if you have a super-custom, SMTP-injecting service built, how can you ignore all of these bounces from a provider thats likeliest to be the major one you are sending to? Unthinkable. I would not like to have business with such a payment provider.

[idopmstuff]

This is the one that gets me - sometimes you're forced to work with systems that do annoying things that you have to accommodate. It's annoying, but it's more important to do the thing that prevents your users from having issues than it is to be theoretically right about whether something's required by a standard.

I've dealt with many worse cases than this, where the systems I was integrating with were doing things that weren't even close to reasonable, but they had the market power so I sucked it up and dealt with it for the sake of my users. Maybe Google's wrong here, but how do you not just implement the solution anyway?

[atmosx]

> Maybe Google's wrong here, but how do you not just implement the solution anyway?

But they just did (make it work). The logical assumption is that most ppl did the same, just used another email provider. Why would viva care? (same as google, why would google care?).

[thesuitonym]

> how can you ignore all of these bounces from a provider thats likeliest to be the major one you are sending to?

This is the major issue that most of the discussion is missing. It doesn't matter how you want to interpret the word SHOULD, if you want to send to google workspace, you MUST include a message-id. It's not like this is some fly-by-night server with 12 clients.

If you absolutely and completely don't want to include the message-id, then you need to have a warning that your service can't be used by Google Workspace customers. This used to be common practice, blocking communication to servers that behaved badly, and I sort of wish we'd bring it back.

[atmosx]

> I would not like to have business with such a payment provider.

Chances are that the decision-makers in most companies don't care about the technicalities (i.e. which email you used for registration) - they want to get up and running.

The reason that Viva doesn't care, I assume, is the reason Google workspace doesn't care: they're both too big to care for 5% of their clients won't do the extra work. They know that their, usually much smaller clients, will "figure it out" by i.e. using another setup that works™. So why bother?

[whizzter]

Since workspaces are probably tied to custom domains all they see if only cursorly looking are "random" businesses with bounces (as TFA mentions, Gmail addresses seem to work fine), sure if you look closer you'll notice the MX might be a google one but going from the cursory look to a closer one takes a bit of time.

[saltmate]

I doubt Google Workspace is going to be the major provider for European businesses

[leansensei]

...and you'd be wrong.

[toomuchtodo]

For now, but with EU digital sovereignty efforts in full swing, it's possible this changes over time. More so if the EU uses regulation to dissuade the use of US Big Tech products and services.

[tick_tock_tick]

This is round 5 or 6 of a " EU digital sovereignty efforts in full swing" maybe this time they will having a success or two but nothing seems to indicate they've changed enough to avoid failing again.

[x0x0]

... which is irrelevant to the demonstrated and shocking incompetence of being unable to deliver either to the #1 or #2 inbox for businesses in the EU?

[toomuchtodo]

Helps justify moving away from them I suppose.