IETF DKIM (date)
November 29, 2007
- Re: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), Douglas Otis, 16:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 15:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jon Callas, 14:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Hector Santos, 14:16
- RE: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), J D Falk, 13:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Hector Santos, 13:44
- Re: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), Scott Kitterman, 13:37
- Re: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), Douglas Otis, 13:20
- creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), J D Falk, 13:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM does domain signing, not mailbox signing, John L, 12:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 12:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 11:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Scott Kitterman, 08:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Charles Lindsey, 04:37
- Fwd: Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Charles Lindsey, 04:34
November 28, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, John Levine, 20:51
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Third-Party Signature Authorizations and Email-Address Restrictions, Douglas Otis, 17:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Scott Kitterman, 17:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 17:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 17:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 16:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jon Callas, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 16:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jon Callas, 16:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 16:14
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Third-Party Signature Authorizations and Email-Address Restrictions, Jim Fenton, 16:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Michael Thomas, 15:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 15:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Michael Thomas, 13:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 13:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 12:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 11:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Charles Lindsey, 06:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Scott Kitterman, 06:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Stephen Farrell, 06:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Michael Thomas, 06:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Michael Thomas, 05:54
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Frank Ellermann, 05:51
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Frank Ellermann, 05:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Michael Thomas, 05:36
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Responsibility vs. Validity, Frank Ellermann, 05:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Hector Santos, 00:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Hector Santos, 00:00
November 27, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Hector Santos, 23:53
- [ietf-dkim] Third-Party Signature Authorizations and Email-Address Restrictions, Douglas Otis, 16:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Jim Fenton, 14:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 14:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Arvel Hathcock, 14:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Arvel Hathcock, 13:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 13:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 13:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, SM, 13:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Steve Atkins, 13:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Dave Crocker, 13:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Steve Atkins, 12:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Douglas Otis, 12:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, ned+dkim, 12:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Hector Santos, 12:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Dave Crocker, 12:11
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, J D Falk, 12:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] IETF-70 Agenda, Jim Fenton, 12:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Steve Atkins, 11:59
- [ietf-dkim] IETF-70 Agenda, Stephen Farrell, 11:37
- [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Dave Crocker, 11:25
November 14, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP-01 Intro's definition of forgery a bit imprecise, Douglas Otis, 18:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Stephen Farrell, 17:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP-01 Intro's definition of forgery a bit imprecise, Arvel Hathcock, 17:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP-01 Intro's definition of forgery a bit imprecise, Jim Fenton, 16:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Jim Fenton, 16:54
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 14:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Michael Thomas, 14:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Michael Thomas, 13:03
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 12:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Stephen Farrell, 09:08
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Scott Kitterman, 08:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Eliot Lear, 08:51
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reportingaddress(fwd), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08:36
November 09, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), John Levine, 22:30
- [ietf-dkim] SSP-01 Intro's definition of forgery a bit imprecise, Douglas Otis, 17:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Hector Santos, 13:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Sensitivity surrounding the "handling" tag, Jim Fenton, 11:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Dave Crocker, 11:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, David Mayne, 10:56
- [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Murray S. Kucherawy, 10:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Michael Thomas, 09:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Mark Delany, 09:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Hector Santos, 09:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Hector Santos, 09:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Hector Santos, 08:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Steve Atkins, 08:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Dave Crocker, 08:49
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Bill.Oxley, 08:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), SM, 08:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, SM, 08:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Steve Atkins, 08:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Eric Allman, 08:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Hector Santos, 07:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Hector Santos, 07:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Steve Atkins, 06:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Hector Santos, 06:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Hector Santos, 05:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Charles Lindsey, 04:41
November 08, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, SM, 22:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Michael Thomas, 18:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Eric Allman, 18:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Murray S. Kucherawy, 18:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Michael Thomas, 17:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Hector Santos, 17:58
- [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y, Hector Santos, 17:49
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address (fwd), Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:41
- [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Frank Ellermann, 17:36
- [ietf-dkim] Re: t=y (was: DKIM Interoperability Event notes), Jim Fenton, 17:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Hector Santos, 17:31
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal to amend SSP draft with a reporting address, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Hector Santos, 17:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Murray S. Kucherawy, 16:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Hector Santos, 16:41
- [ietf-dkim] Authentication-Results: header draft, Murray S. Kucherawy, 15:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Murray S. Kucherawy, 15:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Hector Santos, 15:05
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM Interoperability Event notes, Murray S. Kucherawy, 14:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Nits with section 4 Detailed Description, Arvel Hathcock, 10:20
November 02, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Nits with section 2 Language and Terminology, Jim Fenton, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM/SSP C/C++ API, SM, 15:42
- [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM/SSP C/C++ API, Frank Ellermann, 13:14
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM/SSP C/C++ API, Hector Santos, 12:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Nits with section 1 Introduction, Jim Fenton, 10:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Nits with section 3 Operation Overview, Douglas Otis, 08:00