0

I want to use SES to receive emails for one email address on my domain: myhotstartup.pizza.

The problem is, all our emails for myhotstartup.pizza are currently in Google for Work, so ceo@myhotstartup.pizza for example has a gmail inbox.

Now it seems that I can only receive emails in SES by setting MX records for the whole domain, which are already pointing to Google.

Currently I've put MX records for SES in the subdomain robots.myhotstartup.pizza. I've then set up a forwarder in Google for Work, so that siri@myhotstartup.pizza's emails get forwarded to siri@robots.myhotstartup.pizza, where they're handled by SES.

Is there a better way of doing this? After all, myhotstartup.pizza is going to have over a billion users this time next week, and this approach doesn't really scale so well.

user31415629
  • 301
  • 2
  • 12

2 Answers2

2

Yes this is absolutely possible with dual delivery. You do not change your mx records, Google will send all email to both endpoints.

I've personally done this with gsuite, o365 and premise exchange, all working in tandem. (sent mail not sync but inbound is)

Restatement from https://serverfault.com/a/827765/200560

Jacob Evans
  • 7,636
  • 3
  • 25
  • 55
  • 1
    It says on that page "The email settings described on this page are legacy routing controls. (etc)". They have another method here : https://support.google.com/a/answer/2685650 – Tim Jan 27 '17 at 03:56
0

Your question isn't clear. You need to expand on your scenario if you want good advice. Based on what you've said I think you want to use Google Apps for all but one of your email addresses, and you want to use Amazon SES for the other.

Read here about SES - it's not made as a standard email service for users, it's primarily for AWS based systems to send and receive emails. Amazon Workmail is similar to Gmail. So unless you have a system listening on this email address I'm not sure what you're trying to achieve.

However, if you want to do it, I suggest you just set up a forwarded on the Google account for that user. Yes you'll have to pay the $5/month, but it's the least inelegant way I can see of doing this. Note that I did not say it was elegant.

Tim
  • 30,383
  • 6
  • 47
  • 77