Re: gmail users read on...
George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org> Mon, 15 September 2014 01:47 UTC
Return-Path: <ggm@algebras.org>
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 5DF291A0489 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:47:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-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 fiPvCjdyHtkH for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-pa0-f49.google.com (mail-pa0-f49.google.com [209.85.220.49]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C329E1A0487 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-pa0-f49.google.com with SMTP id lf10so5304518pab.36 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=qFFeSPw7iN5mpYC00wsIYitGz1j3wk65akl3iEZd4pY=; b=Su8UwqK2FcmHIssnfzSAJc7aUTSuFfph21Mr52zsPj2k7IU/JmZYDmwKu4xI8mAsSl i9q8pVWSJFYa43Q6fSqBddTmEgVWswb1so/wXj6LNglRHS6KH2NXZhSL3txUxUzYZXkF XG+Xos91xyT3/Ih44ms59WSuZLWuVUZlZYtfMl1se5JfyEbUG7v5/xt9GWxH1D4wUwuD 5frj5+iExOlup5FKqd8JtPOYHV3UFrHtQJhMV4ho3hFM7/qIzuLOze4qKWcmgZisSAnx pl1A7s0O9/E7Amo7aTW3rwq+b7K/8+U7PomBIyzsKdDzi5EKH4ouLdKXnuPXExe9I9ed QLMg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQkdHYEhz/fwFvFq/Xcu2Gr1rjU1de/e3Yj+k5arLUeKzjaKeQZJfJqhJReXSXeXmojMzMm8
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.69.18.75 with SMTP id gk11mr29496037pbd.92.1410745672457; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.95.135 with HTTP; Sun, 14 Sep 2014 18:47:52 -0700 (PDT)
X-Originating-IP: [2001:dd8:c::531]
In-Reply-To: <E1E602D6-24D1-49EA-AD32-235E25497607@isdg.net>
References: <1409325604012.98047@surrey.ac.uk> <30F00A7A-9800-4F44-B75B-A6196604D27C@live555.com> <E1E602D6-24D1-49EA-AD32-235E25497607@isdg.net>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:47:52 +1000
Message-ID: <CAKr6gn268dBm049DMoBKBsv2=PJeZo3_GPN5rsC4W9n5PEo0Dw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: gmail users read on...
From: George Michaelson <ggm@algebras.org>
To: Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a11363228acf9f8050310d2b9"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/uISbtbYzqqkbQH1b5Lw9CaeL-4o
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: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 01:47:54 -0000
On Mon, Sep 15, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Hector Santos <hsantos@isdg.net> wrote: > 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 have taken the overwhelming majority of *NOG and IETF WG list subscribes out of my corporate identity into the cloud, for two reasons. Firstly, the web tools have become significantly better to the point they are actually significantly better than the MUA on my laptop for free-text search, spamtag, sorting and keyboard accellerators. Secondly, no matter how many times you say "my work does not own my opinions" it remains a risk of taint both ways. I know my work INFORMS my opinions. By using the throwaway generic mails I can establish to my own satisfaction I said it, not my work role. Where it gets complex is when you want to have your corporate, potentially NDA covered work mail in the cloud. I'm not satisfied that the google response (as an example) demands you accept US law and physical storage. If they offered a guarantee its clouds lie inside my own polity, that works better for me. I realise that there are significant players in other economies who are delighted their content is not under the hands of their own law enforcement, but I have other issues. G
- 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