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