Talk:Email hosting service

Email hosting service
I suggest this page to be moved and merged with email authentication as the article is still in its primary stages and the growth on this page is redundant it would be ideal if it is being moved to the above said article. Kalivd (talk) 15:09, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Rename to Mailbox provider

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

No consensus to move. Vegaswikian (talk) 06:15, 7 December 2011 (UTC)

Email hosting service → Mailbox provider – Mailbox Provider is the name that was agreed upon by many IETFers. See RFC 6449 for this and various other definitions, including Access Provider and Email Service Provider. Capitalization is adapted according to Naming conventions (capitalization), and it already varies (see e.g. RFC 6376 (DKIM)). I heard this term from JD Falk a couple of years ago here, and most RFC writers are adopting it because it identifies that functionality clearly and unambiguously.

Along with renaming the page, I propose to make it clear that different business models (e.g. targeting companies, power users, or regular ones), as well as different protocols (e.g. using webmail, IMAP, or POP3) provide for variations of the same functionality.

I already added a section Internet service provider, which should link to this page after renaming. Other references to Mailbox provider are found in Spam reporting, Feedback loop (email), and Email address.

ale (talk) 11:11, 30 November 2011 (UTC)


 * 'Comment: According to WP:COMMONNAME, the name most commonly used is preferable over a name that is part of an official standard but not commonly used by the public. Do you have anything to suggest that "Mailbox provider" is more or less as common as "Email hosting service"? If so, I'd support the move, but if not I think "Email hosting service" makes more sense. Knight of Truth (talk) 00:33, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong oppose This is not about a letter box/mailbox provider. The requested move shows high level of computing bias. Snailmail uses mailboxes. You can rent mailboxes at the post office. 70.24.248.23 (talk) 06:36, 1 December 2011 (UTC)


 * What is an IETFer and is it relevant for determining common usage for a general audience? "Mailbox Provider" sounds like the Royal Mail/USPS or B&Q/Home Depot.  —  AjaxSmack   05:18, 4 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Notification of TfD discussion
This article uses the template Template:Comparison of Email Hosting Providers. I have nominated the template for deletion; anyone watching this article may wish to comment at Templates for discussion/Log/2012 November 24. -- John of Reading (talk) 09:16, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

LIkely spam article
This article is being comment spammed on blogs. I saw this it in the spam queue of a blog that I manage.

The spam text reads, "On-line Write-up: The knowledge outlined from the posting are a few of the greatest to choose from," and it references http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Email_hosting_service (this article). The spam comment was posted from 176.31.223.44 on 6:39 AM PDT today.

Not sure if that IP is connected with any of the services mentioned in this article, but at least one of the services mentioned is using it as free, unsolicited advertising and trying to game search engines. Maybe the article should be deleted? -- Gmatsuda (talk) 14:25, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Removed comparison section
I removed this section, since the providers listed were selected arbitarily, and there are many more providers; basically amounts to free advertising for those listed. Given the fact that this article has been mentioned in several comment spam campaigns on blogs, at least one of the services listed has been using this article for their benefit. -- Gmatsuda (talk)