Am 25.05.2014 01:18, schrieb Jochen Bern: > On -10.01.-28163 20:59, Reindl Harald wrote: >> Am 23.05.2014 17:51, schrieb Jochen Bern: >>> So the specific *LEGAL REQUIREMENTS* I gave as an example don't apply to >>> your servers/organization/country/whatever? Good for you. Now how about >>> we wait for Dmitry to tell us whether or not *he* needs the solution to >>> *his* problem to address such scenarios? >> >> which legal requirements? > > Legal requirements like, for example, these German ones: > http://www.recht-im-internet.de/themen/archivierung.htm > Note that the legalese addresses users acting in the name of a company, > *regardless* of what infrastructure they're using to do so
and *that is* why if you are sending with @domain1.example.com you have to use the MTA responsible for @domain1.example.com strange that you try to contradict what i originally said while you acknowldege it at the same time >> the user *always must* use the one and only SMTP server >> responsible for his domain, especially in times of SPF, >> DKIM and DMARC and spoofing protections for incoming mail
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
