Re: gmail users read on...
Riccardo Bernardini <framefritti@gmail.com> Fri, 29 August 2014 16:02 UTC
Return-Path: <framefritti@gmail.com>
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 3C6E51A064A for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:02:32 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -0.978
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.978 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MISSING_HEADERS=1.021, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
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 sU6hBPxjojr2 for <ietf@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail-yh0-x229.google.com (mail-yh0-x229.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4002:c01::229]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 24FEE1A0647 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:02:31 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mail-yh0-f41.google.com with SMTP id 29so1641914yhl.0 for <ietf@ietf.org>; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:cc :content-type; bh=foLIo12v+mzXVkwDII9+oAD0yF8CrXHHNDj+NgEBwNM=; b=XufpLi9a3s+luPlZY6NKcA6ISclBBThxv9Xz6rsGZmEal8BaFYSwuVJfkA9d+rZBsU fGEzqrp0zJ+rT85ZURrga4EcBQA55ihu7AAmdu0Q6Ndr42ctQl7/oBEQl8QevNzJEzf3 9ebrUYlsqnAOdg0M0XUbJ4CuOLEejGcYzVXUVBvfc+XmLJTM4jwCkJe3SAlj5NxNTBtQ H/XZz3g0oIAzG413bI/GL8TQGN65C2BRYZZx/MZorHBcTtKxOj3tviSv4fFiOGaM7nJy 0herw+5z34vD8WCI59FmsygQH1wtF50pTh7f1rwCDdz1qlZDYH8OyuQffo6azQF6mT9I 2gqQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.236.129.205 with SMTP id h53mr16582221yhi.74.1409328150315; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.170.173.202 with HTTP; Fri, 29 Aug 2014 09:02:30 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <F19E2478-03FC-4B82-BB01-C61037F1C49A@live555.com>
References: <1409325604012.98047@surrey.ac.uk> <54009DC8.7030300@isi.edu> <F19E2478-03FC-4B82-BB01-C61037F1C49A@live555.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Aug 2014 18:02:30 +0200
Message-ID: <CABSMSPW6s8-tLvMRNOfYaTu_ogigJHmMpFpAfThaG3zku6ZDow@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: gmail users read on...
From: Riccardo Bernardini <framefritti@gmail.com>
Cc: IETF Discussion Mailing List <ietf@ietf.org>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="20cf301afd97c587cd0501c6c76c"
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ietf/wd4tTb4STcwheY0mRBm56U1QjZ4
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 16:02:32 -0000
I am a professional, but to the IETF lists (and other mailing list) I subscribe via gmail because (i) the largest quota of gmail (ML, especial open source related ones, can easily clog your mailbox) and (ii) I find more convenient the "label" approach of gmail, rather the usual "folder-based" approach. In other words, gmail has features that the mail of my university has not. On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 5:54 PM, Ross Finlayson <finlayson@live555.com> wrote: > > I've also seen many people who keep a gmail or other mass market account > > as a professional address knowing that they will move between > > institutional addresses. As companies come and go faster and people > > transition between them more often, keeping a semi-permanent > > professional contact point is a sound strategy. > > Can these people really be confident that "gmail.com" will outlive their > professional life? At the very least, they should use their own domain > name - even if they use a GMail or Yahoo Mail-type service to host their > email. (As an extra benefit - to keep this message on-topic - the email > that they send won't be subject to DMARC.) > > The fact that such services are useful is undeniable. As is the fact that > "@yahoo.com" and "@gmail.com" email address look unprofessional. They > just do. > > 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