Summary
Establishing and maintaining a strong email sending domain and IP reputation is crucial for business partnerships, especially when multiple entities are involved in sending emails. The core challenge lies in balancing brand identity with deliverability risk management. Partners often face decisions about using shared or dedicated IPs, root domains versus subdomains, and how to effectively manage transactional versus marketing email streams to preserve reputation.
Key findings
- Subdomain segregation: Using subdomains for different email types (e.g., transactional, marketing) or for partner sending is a common and recommended practice. This helps to isolate reputation issues, ensuring that a problem with one subdomain does not severely impact the reputation of the main domain. Learn more about IP and subdomain warmup.
- IP address choice: Dedicated IPs are generally recommended for high-volume senders or those who want maximum control over their sending reputation. Shared IPs can be suitable for lower volumes but expose senders to the reputation risks of other users on that IP. For more on this, consult resources on email deliverability best practices.
- Authentication protocols: Implementing SPF, DKIM, and DMARC is fundamental for domain authentication and protecting sender reputation. These protocols verify that emails are legitimate and prevent spoofing. Find out more about a simple guide to DMARC, SPF, and DKIM.
- Brand consistency: While subdomains offer protection, maintaining brand consistency in sending domains across partners requires careful planning. The choice of domain name can influence recipient trust and recognition.
Key considerations
- Risk mitigation: When a business partner uses a subdomain delegated to your ESP, the primary concern is the potential impact on the main brand's reputation if the subdomain experiences deliverability issues. Clear agreements on sending practices are essential.
- Transactional email management: Transactional emails have different sending patterns and reputation requirements than marketing emails. It's often best to separate their sending infrastructure (IPs and subdomains) to ensure critical messages are delivered reliably.
- Verification challenges: Verifying the email sending practices of a partner, especially regarding their IP cleanliness, can be challenging without direct insight into their operations. This underscores the need for clear agreements and monitoring.
- Warming up new sending domains/IPs: Any new domain or IP used for sending, even a subdomain, requires a proper warm-up process to build a positive sending reputation with ISPs. This involves gradually increasing sending volume over time.
- Separate ESPs: For true separation and risk management, it can be beneficial for distinct entities in a partnership to use separate ESPs, or at least separate subdomains within the same ESP configured to prevent cross-reputation impact.
What email marketers say
Email marketers frequently navigate the complexities of domain and IP reputation when entering business partnerships, particularly concerning transactional email delivery. There is a common understanding that subdomains offer a layer of protection for the main brand, but debate exists on the extent to which root domains might still be impacted. The consensus leans towards maintaining strict control over one's own sending infrastructure and being cautious about shared IP environments.
Key opinions
- Subdomain protection: Many marketers believe that using a subdomain like email.brand.com effectively insulates the root domain brand.com from deliverability issues. This is a common strategy for delegating sending responsibility.
- Root domain influence: Some marketers express concern that even with subdomains, top-level domain reputation might still influence subdomain performance, especially with certain email clients or ISPs. This suggests that the separation isn't always absolute.
- Transactional email isolation: There is a strong preference for placing transactional emails on a separate subdomain and IP from marketing emails due to their critical nature and distinct sending patterns. This practice helps to maintain high deliverability for essential communications.
- IP sharing caution: Marketers are generally hesitant to allow other companies to send from their dedicated IP addresses unless it's a shared environment where minimal volume is sent, as unverified sending practices by partners can quickly damage their own IP reputation.
Key considerations
- Subdomain delegation: Delegating a subdomain to an ESP for a partner's transactional emails is considered a standard and acceptable configuration, provided proper reputation management and authentication are in place.
- Warming process: Any new subdomain used for sending should undergo a warming period, similar to a new IP address. This helps ISPs recognize the sending patterns and content, mitigating initial deliverability risks. Consult a guide on factors influencing email deliverability.
- Separate sending domains: To properly manage diverse sending needs and ensure optimal deliverability, each entity or even each email stream (e.g., transactional, marketing) within a partnership should ideally utilize its own distinct subdomain for sending. This practice is highlighted in articles discussing IP address best practices.
- Monitoring and transparency: While transactional emails may pose fewer risks due to their controlled nature, ongoing monitoring of deliverability metrics for all sending domains and IPs is essential. Transparency between partners regarding email practices can help prevent unforeseen issues.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks explains that the primary purpose of using a subdomain for email sending, such as email.brand.com, is to ensure that if any deliverability issues arise, only the subdomain's reputation is affected, not the root domain. This allows for easier recovery by simply switching to a new subdomain if needed.
Marketer view
Email marketer from Email Geeks notes that handing over a subdomain to an Email Service Provider (ESP) for a partner's sending is a standard industry practice. This configuration is widely accepted and utilized by many organizations to manage their email streams effectively.
What the experts say
Experts in email deliverability consistently advocate for a segmented approach to domain and IP management, especially in partnership scenarios. They stress the importance of isolating different email streams to protect core brand reputation. While acknowledging the independence of subdomain reputation, experts also highlight the need for proper configuration and careful monitoring to avoid unintended negative impacts on the parent domain, reinforcing the best practice of dedicated infrastructure for distinct sending purposes.
Key opinions
- Subdomain independence: Experts widely agree that SPF records on a subdomain should not be affected by or impact SPF records on the root domain, and vice versa. Each subdomain (or sending domain) should have its own configured authentication.
- Standard ESP practice: Assigning a subdomain to an ESP for sending is a completely normal and preferred setup. This practice does not inherently impact the ESP's reputation or the primary domain's reputation, provided it's managed correctly.
- Granular control: For optimal deliverability management in partnerships, experts recommend that each distinct sending entity or email type (e.g., transactional, marketing) should have its own dedicated subdomain. This ensures more precise control over individual sending reputations.
- Authentication crucial: Proper email authentication (SPF, DKIM, DMARC) is seen as foundational. Without these, even well-intentioned sending can be flagged as suspicious by mailbox providers.
Key considerations
- Potential for misconfiguration: While subdomains and root domains are generally separate regarding SPF, recipient domains could have misconfigurations that cause unexpected validation issues. This highlights the importance of thorough testing, perhaps with an email deliverability tester.
- Holistic reputation: Although technical separation exists, a persistently poor reputation on a subdomain can, over time, subtly influence perceptions or even filtering decisions related to the overall parent domain's brand, especially if brand affiliation is strong. Understanding how to manage your email domain reputation is key.
- IP warming importance: A new dedicated IP, even for transactional emails, requires a warm-up period to establish a positive sending history with ISPs. Neglecting this can lead to initial deliverability problems. More on this can be found in discussions about IP vs. domain reputation.
- Clear communication: In business partnerships, clear agreements on email sending responsibilities, volume, frequency, and content are paramount. This proactive communication can prevent reputation issues before they arise.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks clarified that SPF for a subdomain should not typically be impacted by the SPF of the root domain. They stated that this separation should hold true unless the recipient domain has made a significant configuration error in their setup.
Expert view
Expert from Email Geeks confirmed that assigning a subdomain to an ESP is a completely normal practice and should not negatively affect the ESP's reputation. They highlighted this as a standard configuration they preferred when managing client setups.
What the documentation says
Official documentation from various email providers and industry standards outlines a clear set of best practices for managing email sending domains and IP reputation, particularly in complex scenarios like business partnerships. These guidelines consistently emphasize the segregation of email streams, robust authentication, and proactive reputation management. The core message is to minimize risk by maintaining distinct sending identities for different types of email and ensuring full compliance with technical standards.
Key findings
- Subdomain segregation: Using separate subdomains (e.g., mail.example.com for marketing, transactional.example.com for alerts) is a standard recommendation to isolate reputation issues and manage different traffic patterns effectively.
- Dedicated vs. shared IPs: Documentation often suggests dedicated IPs for high-volume or critical transactional sending to provide more control, while shared IPs are deemed suitable for lower volumes where the collective reputation of the pool is managed by the ESP.
- Authentication protocols: Comprehensive implementation of SPF, DKIM, and DMARC records for all sending domains and subdomains is critical. These protocols verify sender legitimacy, reduce spam, and provide valuable feedback on authentication failures. Our guide on DMARC policies offers more insight.
- Consistent sending practices: Mailbox providers look for consistent sending volume, frequency, and content quality from a given IP and domain. Erratic sending patterns can negatively impact reputation.
Key considerations
- Warm-up procedures: Any new IP address or sending domain (including subdomains) must undergo a proper warm-up process to establish a positive reputation with internet service providers (ISPs) and mailbox providers (MBPs).
- Bounce and complaint rates: Monitoring and actively managing bounce rates (especially hard bounces) and complaint rates (spam reports) are crucial. High rates are strong indicators of poor sending practices and will harm reputation. Understand how to recover from blocklist listings.
- List hygiene: Regularly cleaning email lists to remove inactive users, invalid addresses, and known spam traps is fundamental to maintaining high deliverability and avoiding reputation damage. This includes understanding the impact of email deliverability factors on sender reputation.
- Feedback loops: Subscribing to ISP feedback loops (FBLs) provides direct insight into recipient spam complaints, allowing senders to promptly remove complainers from their lists and mitigate further damage.
Technical article
Documentation from Twilio states that understanding the difference between IP reputation and domain reputation is crucial, as both significantly influence overall email deliverability. While closely related, they track different aspects of sender legitimacy and behavior.
Technical article
Salesforce documentation emphasizes that positive sender reputation signals to mailbox providers that the sending entity is trustworthy and sends legitimate communications, which is a crucial factor for ensuring messages reach the inbox.
Related resources
10 resources
![[Webinar] Email Deliverability: Best Practices for Reaching ...](https://community.hubspot.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/64874i535C7FB6CE25AE0B?v=v2)
Related pages
What are common email deliverability issues during new IP and subdomain warmup after ESP migration?
How to set up DMARC, DKIM, and SPF for emails from a web server and manage bounce responses?
A simple guide to DMARC, SPF, and DKIM
A practical guide to understanding your email domain reputation
How long does it take to recover domain reputation from Bad/Low to High
What happens when your ip gets blocklisted?
What happens when your domain is on an email blacklist?
What factors influence email deliverability and how does SenderScore work?
When to consider multiple dedicated IPs for large email lists and what causes deliverability degradation?
Does a new dedicated IP for transactional emails fix existing deliverability problems?
