IETF 822 (date)
January 28, 2005
- Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Frank Ellermann, 23:59
- Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly, 15:45
- Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey, 10:13
January 18, 2005
- Re: terminology, Laird Breyer, 17:46
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Laird Breyer, 17:32
- Re: terminology, Keith Moore, 10:11
- terminology, Bruce Lilly, 09:37
- Re: Resent- fields, Bruce Lilly, 09:37
- Re: non-standard prefixing considered harmful, unnecessary fiddling with message content considered harmful, Bruce Lilly, 09:37
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Philip Hazel, 06:33
- Re: General considerations for new message field specifications, Charles Lindsey, 05:12
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Charles Lindsey, 05:12
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Charles Lindsey, 05:12
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Charles Lindsey, 05:12
- Re: Experiment #3 with multiple Reference headers, Paul Overell, 02:23
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Philip Hazel, 02:18
January 17, 2005
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, william(at)elan.net, 20:53
- Experiment #3 with multiple Reference headers, Charles Lindsey, 20:12
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Charles Lindsey, 20:12
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Laird Breyer, 20:10
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, william(at)elan.net, 17:43
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Laird Breyer, 17:13
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Charles Lindsey, 10:32
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Keith Moore, 09:56
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, william(at)elan.net, 06:53
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Keith Moore, 06:10
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Tony Finch, 04:43
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Richard Clayton, 03:22
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Philip Hazel, 02:30
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Paul Overell, 02:19
January 16, 2005
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Keith Moore, 17:38
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Tony Finch, 17:02
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, william(at)elan.net, 16:42
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers, Frank Ellermann, 15:22
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Keith Moore, 15:17
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Philip Hazel, 14:57
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Keith Moore, 14:19
- Re: General considerations for new message field specifications, Bruce Lilly, 13:54
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Frank Ellermann, 11:07
January 14, 2005
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Keith Moore, 18:21
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Bruce Lilly, 16:00
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Bruce Lilly, 15:51
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Bruce Lilly, 15:43
- Re: Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 10:27
- Re: General considerations for new message field specifications, Charles Lindsey, 10:12
- Experiment #2 with multiple Reference headers (was References with multipl, Charles Lindsey, 10:12
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Laurence Lundblade, 09:47
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Tony Finch, 08:52
- Re: Experiment with multiple Reference headers (was References with multiple precursore [sic]), Charles Lindsey, 08:37
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Charles Lindsey, 08:37
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Keith Moore, 07:02
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Tony Finch, 06:51
- Re: Experiment with multiple Reference headers (was References with multiple precursore [sic]), Tony Finch, 06:42
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 06:42
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Keith Moore, 06:05
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 05:39
- Re: Making group syntax do-not-generate, Keith Moore, 05:04
- Making group syntax do-not-generate, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 02:40
January 13, 2005
- Re: Experiment with multiple Reference headers (was References with multiple precursore [sic]), Bart Schaefer, 22:44
- Re: Experiment with multiple Reference headers (was References with multiple precursore [sic]), Laird Breyer, 18:25
- General considerations for new message field specifications, Bruce Lilly, 17:28
- Re: Experiment with multiple Reference headers (was References with multiple precursore [sic]), Richard Clayton, 12:05
- Re: Experiment with multiple Reference headers, Frank Ellermann, 11:32
- Re: Experiment with multiple Reference headers (was References with multiple precursore [sic]), Keith Moore, 07:47
- Re: References with multiple precursors (was Attempts at establishing harmful conventions), Charles Lindsey, 05:12
- Experiment with multiple Reference headers (was References with multiple precursore [sic]), Charles Lindsey, 05:12