[vcf-midatlantic] why all my email is plain text

Jason Perkins perkins.jason at gmail.com
Sat Jul 3 16:23:06 UTC 2021

Where I work we are in the process of migrating services to Azure. Our mail
and internal portal have been in Office 365 for some time.

It’s nice how dynamic “the cloud” can be with resources. I don’t have to
worry about mailbox storage volumes, backups, legal compliance holds…
they’re just a check box. If the power goes out at our office I don’t have
to worry that 7,000 people can’t get to their mail. Of course some things
are harder, like exporting / importing whole mailboxes.

I recently wrote a script that emails people before their passwords expire.
This needed 3 different modules for interacting with Azure AD and Exchange;
a module which was supposed to be the updated replacement for the original
MSOnline module doesn’t have all the functionality of the original. I don’t
think it will be added either, it sounds like MS is going to dump the
PowerShell modules all together and go to only API based calls? Fine if
you’re a programmer I suppose… not if you’re a scripted.

I would love… LOVE to move our primary application to Azure. We have 26 web
servers that make it run today, if it could run in IIS as a service instead
it would be so much easier to expand as load increases. But the software
uses external modules for report generation, which IIS as a service does t

My main gripe with “the cloud” is that it’s a bit too ADHD, in that some
systems seem like “oooo shiny!”, are developed to ~80%, then the next shiny
thing comes along…

I have never run my own personal mail server, but I’ve done it enough
professionally to know I don’t want to, either. I just want my mail “to
work” and not have to fuss with it. Does that mean I’m giving all my info
to “don’t be evil” Google? Yes. But everything is a trade off. I’ve got
another account from mail.com that I sometimes use, but I suspect Google
will be around longer.


On Sat, Jul 3, 2021 at 11:53 AM Dave McGuire via vcf-midatlantic <
vcf-midatlantic at lists.vcfed.org> wrote:

> On 7/3/21 11:11 AM, dave.g4ugm at gmail.com wrote:
> >>> I will just say that in some environments we may have no choice. When I
> >> worked all external e-mail servers were blocked, including any webmail
> >> servers, and the company e-mail was a web front end that did not have
> any
> >> option for plain text e-mail.
> >>
> >>   Rushing in and using complex tools without learning anything about
> them
> >> first isn't exclusive to individuals, corporations do it too.  And
> further up the
> >> chain to the vendor, there's really nothing that a corporation won't
> abuse
> >> (knowingly or otherwise) in order to make more money.
> >>
> >>   And this STILL doesn't make it right.
> >
> > I am so glad I am out of this. There is such a push to "modernise" when
> existing methods work.
>   Yes.  And more to the point, the corporations on the vendor side of
> the equation are doing that pushing for profit.  The problem is, that's
> not how the Internet works.  There are accepted standards (RFCs), and a
> standardization process, that is peer-reviewed in the engineering
> community and not corporation-centric.  Corporations don't seem to
> realize that they are NOT WELCOME to try to unilaterally change the very
> basics of how the Internet works.
>   Until those standards (RFCs 822, 2822, 5322 in this context) are
> superseded by new standards, drafted by ENGINEERS (not marketing people)
> and reviewed by OTHER ENGINEERS, those standards stand, and that's all
> there is to it.
>   It's true that "RFC" stands for "Request For Comment", but before
> anyone points that out, very early on (in the 1970s) they morphed into
> being considered standards documents.
>   This is distinct from things like "RS-232" (where "RS" stands for
> "Recommended Standard"), which is actually "RS-232C"...the standard was
> ratified and named "EIA-232-D", but we still call it "RS-232".  (the
> current revision is EIA-232-F)  Unlike this, the RFC world does not
> rename its work-in-progress standards when they are considered to be
> accepted by the engineering community.
>   (I know you know this; this is for the benefit of others here)
>   There will always be those people who just float through life ignoring
> the widely-accepted rules and standards that exist to keep everything
> working well and keep everyone happy.  "Good netizens" get angry at
> them, or just laugh at them behind their backs, every day.
> > We got pushed into cloud-based computing when we could deliver it
> cheaper on site.
> > My manager wanted to ditch tape backups and switch to "cloud based" but
> could never tell me what the business benefits were or how he would fund
> the extra bandwidth needed.
>   Yup.  Moron alert.  This is what happens when technical decisions are
> made by nontechnical people in reaction to glossy advertisements in
> business magazines.  There used to be a website "fuckedcompany.com" that
> chronicled these sorts of poor decisions.
> > I remember years ago when I worked for Compaq they moved the employee
> expenses from a VT100 forms based system to a Web Forms system. The extra
> work must have cost them a fortune.
>   Yup, for little or no tangible benefit.  I bet some consulting firm
> made out like bandits on that.
> >>   None of this reflects poorly on you personally, of course.  No
> disrespect
> >> intended.
> >
> > We don't always see eye to eye and life would be boring if we did, but
> there are some things we agree on..
>   Yes.
>              -Dave
> --
> Dave McGuire, AK4HZ
> New Kensington, PA
Jason Perkins 313 355 0085 Sent from my iPhone

More information about the vcf-midatlantic mailing list