Re: gmail users read on...
Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> Sun, 14 September 2014 14:12 UTC
Return-Path: <hsantos@isdg.net>
X-Original-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ietf@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1B3341A03AB for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 07:12:35 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.001
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.001 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BAh2cEeJQWkn for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 07:12:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim.winserver.com (ntbbs.winserver.com [208.247.131.9]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 652D41A03A8 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 07:12:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; d=isdg.net; s=tms1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple/relaxed; l=1611; t=1410703945; h=Received:Received: Message-Id:From:Subject:Date:To:Organization:List-ID; bh=APHDIK+ EA6HtBZ09B7+AorQJV6E=; b=B68nfDFGq3277knaeSczgRjRBzM4gLvvHpKQNCJ Emc9V+YN+BPwL1iek3eelcR00cWPju2L6f+/ffQlIjvcFmPEYfCa2wYTY4reGok0 nLQLf/3RtOCSafj4izjGb/0iR0bOlw6T+gYu8pB/+/6dw+kCBIup8cJjMRLXTEX0 8QQ4=
Received: by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP Router v7.0.454.4) for ietf@ietf.org; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 10:12:25 -0400
Received: from [192.168.1.67] (99-121-4-27.lightspeed.miamfl.sbcglobal.net [99.121.4.27]) by winserver.com (Wildcat! SMTP v7.0.454.4) with ESMTP id 1594038702.1.4548; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 10:12:24 -0400
References: <1409325604012.98047@surrey.ac.uk> <30F00A7A-9800-4F44-B75B-A6196604D27C@live555.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (1.0)
In-Reply-To: <30F00A7A-9800-4F44-B75B-A6196604D27C@live555.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <E1E602D6-24D1-49EA-AD32-235E25497607@isdg.net>
X-Mailer: iPad Mail (11D257)
From: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Subject: Re: gmail users read on...
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 10:12:21 -0400
To: Ross Finlayson <finlayson@live555.com>
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/6KDXg9YtYFRyz0RXG4UtLOn8HuU
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
X-BeenThere: ietf@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: IETF-Discussion <ietf.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/ietf/>
List-Post: <mailto:ietf@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf>, <mailto:ietf-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2014 14:12:35 -0000
The whole point of using theses alias or junk domains was to help protect your real professional domains and also get around some restrictions or slow down using your professional domain. However, overtime, these junk domains have become more embedded in people's lives. They are using them more across more services. It has become a "second life" for many. I'm old school, so I wonder how it had changed at the corporate level, I.e. Doing work related to your job using external domains. But times are changing where it can be expected to have some external address, if only to get around some corporate restriction. Just the other day, I had to use a customer's gmail address to get around an attachment IT filtering delay. And I also have two subscriptions to this list. One using my non-corporate but professional address and one with gmail. I had used it to compare acceptance and distribution delays. -- Hector Santos http://www.santronics.com On Aug 29, 2014, at 11:36 AM, Ross Finlayson <finlayson@live555.com> wrote: >> Counterpoint: I know of a 20person company that ran off google apps and gmail (under an owned domain) > > Yes, using your own (or your company's, or your school's) domain name is fine - even with hosted email services like GMail and Yahoo Mail. (In fact, if Yahoo Mail users choose use their own domain name - rather than "@yahoo.com" - then the email that they send won't be subject to DMARC.) It's just the "@yahoo.com" or "@gmail.com" domain name that looks unprofessional. > > Ross. > >
- gmail users read on... Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... Rich Kulawiec
- Re: gmail users read on... Andrew G. Malis
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Michael Richardson
- Re: gmail users read on... Mary Barnes
- RE: gmail users read on... l.wood
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Ted Faber
- Re: gmail users read on... Tim Bray
- Re: gmail users read on... TJ
- Re: gmail users read on... Ross Finlayson
- Re: gmail users read on... Riccardo Bernardini
- Re: gmail users read on... Paul Hoffman
- Re: gmail users read on... TJ
- Re: gmail users read on... Ted Faber
- Re: gmail users read on... joel jaeggli
- Re: gmail users read on... Phillip Hallam-Baker
- Re: gmail users read on... [technical subtopic] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Brian E Carpenter
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Andrew G. Malis
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Hector Santos
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Antonio Prado
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Joe Abley
- Re: gmail users read on... [bozo subtopic] Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Nico Williams
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Christian Huitema
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… George Michaelson
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Miles Fidelman
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Theodore Ts'o
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Donald Eastlake
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Viktor Dukhovni
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- RE: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… MH Michael Hammer (5304)
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Doug Barton
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Nico Williams
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Sabahattin Gucukoglu
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John C Klensin
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Wei Chuang
- Re: gmail users read on... Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Scott Kitterman
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Hector Santos
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Dave Crocker
- Re: gmail users read on... George Michaelson
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… David Morris
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… John Levine
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Rich Kulawiec
- Re: dmarc damage, was gmail users read on... [boz… Rich Kulawiec