>> Do I need a separate email for when I am living out of a suitcase for >> 6 months at Holiday Inn too? > > Sorry but, honestly, is this still a big problem in today's world? We > solved this long again didn't we? Who is using the hotel's email system > who can not also get to their corporate email either via VPN or a web > mail interface?
Using a back-haul link to the organization's server certainly does cover many cases of remote access (home, travel, etc.). However it does not cover all. Counter examples include: Kiosk access and access through some PDAs. They often require relying on a Submissions Agent under control of the local access operator, not the user's organization. We need to acknowledge this and deal with it. Whether dealing with it means saying "we don't handle that case" or defining how things DO work with those scenarios, is a matter for group creativity and consensus. But please let's not make the same mistake as the path registration folks, and pretend these cases are not important. My own thoughts on how to deal with it: 1. Document the back-haul scenarios that make this a non-problem. 2. Handle the cases in which it *is* a problem, such as by describing how to use different d= names to distinguish stable, organization-based mail from mail sent by (possibly mobile) individuals. We need to remember that d= creates the ability to have different sub-domains for DKIM than show up in the rfc2822.From field. Thoughts? d/ -- Dave Crocker Brandenburg InternetWorking bbiw.net _______________________________________________ NOTE WELL: This list operates according to http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html
