Organizations deploying Kong Mesh in environments with multiple security domains must consider various architectural approaches to meet specific security requirements. Kong Mesh, built on the CNCF-hosted Kuma project, offers three main strategies: using a zone, a mesh, or the global control plane as the security domain boundary. Each approach has distinct advantages and disadvantages, such as enhanced flexibility with zones, the logical separation of policies with meshes, or complete independence with the global control plane. Zones allow for flexible application of mesh policies but risk unintentional cross-domain traffic without proper policies. Meshes provide separate policy domains, reducing the chance of misapplied policies, while supporting cross-mesh inspection and controls. The global control plane approach offers complete autonomy for each security domain but requires separate policy management, which could increase operational overhead. Ultimately, the choice depends on the organization's specific needs, whether they require strict isolation or flexible integration, as Kong Mesh supports diverse configurations to accommodate different security requirements.