RE: gmail users read on...
<l.wood@surrey.ac.uk> Fri, 29 August 2014 15:20 UTC
Return-Path: <l.wood@surrey.ac.uk>
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 D9E011A0537 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 08:20:19 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.601
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.601 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, UNPARSEABLE_RELAY=0.001] 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 9AtuCy1Bkced for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 08:20:16 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com (mail1.bemta3.messagelabs.com [195.245.230.162]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 910111A04E9 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 08:20:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from [85.158.137.99:26177] by server-2.bemta-3.messagelabs.com id DE/19-09149-52A90045; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:20:05 +0000
X-Env-Sender: l.wood@surrey.ac.uk
X-Msg-Ref: server-10.tower-217.messagelabs.com!1409325604!21953271!1
X-Originating-IP: [131.227.200.35]
X-StarScan-Received:
X-StarScan-Version: 6.11.3; banners=-,-,-
X-VirusChecked: Checked
Received: (qmail 18610 invoked from network); 29 Aug 2014 15:20:04 -0000
Received: from exht021p.surrey.ac.uk (HELO EXHT021P.surrey.ac.uk) (131.227.200.35) by server-10.tower-217.messagelabs.com with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 29 Aug 2014 15:20:04 -0000
Received: from EXHY022V.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.201.104) by EXHT021P.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.200.35) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.3.348.2; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 16:20:03 +0100
Received: from emea01-am1-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (131.227.201.241) by EXHY022v.surrey.ac.uk (131.227.201.104) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.3.195.1; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 16:20:03 +0100
Received: from AMSPR06MB439.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.23.19) by AMSPR06MB438.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com (10.242.23.15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 15.0.1015.19; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:20:03 +0000
Received: from AMSPR06MB439.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.242.23.19]) by AMSPR06MB439.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com ([10.242.23.19]) with mapi id 15.00.1015.018; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:20:03 +0000
From: l.wood@surrey.ac.uk
To: rsk@gsp.org, ietf@ietf.org
Subject: RE: gmail users read on...
Thread-Topic: gmail users read on...
Thread-Index: AQHPw5y0DGmWnqc+P02CIm8y8/RKvg==
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:20:03 +0000
Message-ID: <1409325604012.98047@surrey.ac.uk>
Accept-Language: en-AU, en-US
Content-Language: en-AU
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
x-ms-exchange-transport-fromentityheader: Hosted
x-originating-ip: [124.170.214.211]
x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0;PCL:0;RULEID:;UriScan:;
x-forefront-prvs: 0318501FAE
x-forefront-antispam-report: SFV:NSPM; SFS:(6009001)(189002)(377454003)(199003)(24454002)(92726001)(95666004)(92566001)(86362001)(15202345003)(105586002)(87936001)(76482001)(77982001)(74502001)(2656002)(85852003)(19580405001)(117636001)(15975445006)(4396001)(83072002)(83322001)(19580395003)(15395725005)(31966008)(21056001)(106116001)(90102001)(74482001)(64706001)(66066001)(50986999)(101416001)(46102001)(107886001)(85306004)(74662001)(15198665003)(79102001)(106356001)(81342001)(20776003)(54356999)(107046002)(80022001)(99396002)(81542001)(36756003); DIR:OUT; SFP:; SCL:1; SRVR:AMSPR06MB438; H:AMSPR06MB439.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com; FPR:; MLV:sfv; PTR:InfoNoRecords; MX:1; A:1; LANG:en;
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-OrganizationHeadersPreserved: AMSPR06MB438.eurprd06.prod.outlook.com
X-CrossPremisesHeadersFiltered: EXHY022v.surrey.ac.uk
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/capgOUvfN8nV_wWbeBgah01eCRg
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: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 15:20:20 -0000
Counterpoint: I know of a 20person company that ran off google apps and gmail (under an owned domain) for over a year, and are only transitioning off it to inhouse corporate Exchange after the subsequent acquisition and IPO. Many use these services, because they're better and more reliable for their purposes than the alternatives available to them. They're making professional choices. Lloyd Wood http://about.me/lloydwood ________________________________________ From: ietf <ietf-bounces@ietf.org> on behalf of Rich Kulawiec <rsk@gsp.org> Sent: Friday, 29 August 2014 10:11:01 PM To: IETF discussion list Subject: Re: gmail users read on... On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 05:05:53PM +1200, Brian E Carpenter wrote: > I hate to bring this topic up again but people should perhaps be aware > that some legitimate IETF mail is now being automatically spam filtered > for gmail recipients. Gmail, like Yahoo and Hotmail and AOL, is sporadically useful for casual purposes where mail transmission and receipt isn't terribly important. But it's much too poorly operated to be acceptable for professional use. And of course it's well-known that attempts to contact a clueful human behind the Google monolith are nearly always destined to fail. ---rsk
- 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