IETF DKIM (date)
March 31, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 16:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Mark Delany, 16:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 15:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, ned+dkim, 15:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Arvel Hathcock, 15:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Arvel Hathcock, 15:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Eric Rescorla, 15:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Tony Hansen, 14:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Tony Hansen, 14:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 13:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 12:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 12:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Barry Leiba, 12:07
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Bill.Oxley, 11:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 11:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Barry Leiba, 11:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 09:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Barry Leiba, 08:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 08:15
March 30, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Mark Delany, 20:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 18:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Jim Fenton, 18:01
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Jim Fenton, 17:38
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Douglas Otis, 15:46
- RE: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 15:30
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Dave Crocker, 15:04
- RE: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 15:01
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Mark Delany, 14:44
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Dave Crocker, 14:26
- RE: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 13:56
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 13:48
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Mark Delany, 13:25
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Douglas Otis, 13:08
- RE: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11:55
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Jim Fenton, 11:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Paul Hoffman, 09:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Stephen Farrell, 05:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, John Levine, 05:28
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hector Santos, 02:17
March 28, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] WG last call on threats draft, Stephen Farrell, 14:44
- [ietf-dkim] Compromize?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 13:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65, DKIM Chair, 12:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65, DKIM Chair, 11:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Hector Santos, 11:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65, Douglas Otis, 11:08
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], william(at)elan.net, 10:47
- RE: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Michael Thomas, 10:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Jim Fenton, 10:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Paul Hoffman, 10:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Michael Thomas, 10:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Jim Fenton, 10:17
- [ietf-dkim] Issues summary from IETF65 meeting, DKIM Chair, 10:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Jim Fenton, 09:56
- RE: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Bill.Oxley, 09:56
- RE: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Jim Fenton, 09:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65, Eliot Lear, 09:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Stephen Farrell, 09:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Stephen Farrell, 09:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Arvel Hathcock, 09:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Paul Hoffman, 09:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65, Hector Santos, 08:17
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hector Santos, 08:16
- [ietf-dkim] mailing lists and -base, Michael Thomas, 08:06
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], william(at)elan.net, 07:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Graham Murray, 07:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65, DKIM Chair, 07:11
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Tony Hansen, 06:58
- [ietf-dkim] Draft DKIM minutes from IETF65, DKIM Chair, 06:41
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hector Santos, 00:47
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Jim Fenton, 00:42
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hector Santos, 00:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hector Santos, 00:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc, Mark Delany, 00:29
March 27, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc, Eliot Lear, 23:54
- RE: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 22:17
- Re: SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Jim Fenton, 21:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Tony Hansen, 21:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 20:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Douglas Otis, 19:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Douglas Otis, 19:03
- SSP RR vs TXT [was Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values], Hector Santos, 18:54
- RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Bill.Oxley, 18:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Jim Fenton, 18:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Jim Fenton, 18:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Paul Hoffman, 18:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc, Jim Fenton, 18:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Mike Wolf, 18:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Douglas Otis, 18:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Tony Hansen, 16:24
- [ietf-dkim] Recommend not adding DNS RR(s) into DKIM base doc, Mark Delany, 16:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Mark Delany, 15:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Dave Crocker, 15:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] base: is anyone actually *using* n= in their dns records?, Mark Delany, 15:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Paul Hoffman, 15:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Arvel Hathcock, 14:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft Side Channel Language, Eric Rescorla, 12:35
- [ietf-dkim] Draft Side Channel Language, Eric Rescorla, 11:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Douglas Otis, 10:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative to SSP, Douglas Otis, 10:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 09:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Stephen Farrell, 09:37
- [ietf-dkim] jabber interims..., Stephen Farrell, 09:25
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Bill.Oxley, 08:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Arvel Hathcock, 08:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Stephen Farrell, 03:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hector Santos, 02:43
March 26, 2006
- [ietf-dkim] SSP and o= values, Tony Hansen, 20:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Michael Thomas, 18:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 18:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 17:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 15:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hector Santos, 12:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] base: is anyone actually *using* n= in their dns records?, Tony Hansen, 12:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Dave Crocker, 11:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile, Arvel Hathcock, 11:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 10:55
- [ietf-dkim] base: is anyone actually *using* n= in their dns records?, Eliot Lear, 09:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Eliot Lear, 01:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile, Jim Fenton, 00:36
March 25, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 13:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 13:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Michael Thomas, 12:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 12:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 12:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Dave Crocker, 12:11
- [ietf-dkim] New issue: optional exponent needed or not?, Stephen Farrell, 10:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Barry Leiba, 10:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Paul Hoffman, 09:51
- [ietf-dkim] Going to a single hash algorithm, Paul Hoffman, 09:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Stephen Farrell, 09:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Dave Crocker, 09:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile, Hector Santos, 01:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hector Santos, 01:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Working Group Summary, IETF 65, Barry Leiba, 00:01
March 24, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile, Jim Fenton, 20:11
- [ietf-dkim] Splitting the DKIM base doc, Barry Leiba, 17:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 17:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 12:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Jim Fenton, 12:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, william(at)elan.net, 11:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile, Arvel Hathcock, 11:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 10:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 10:09
- RE: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:58
- 1193 Proposal Benefits: [Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful], Hector Santos, 08:19
- [ietf-dkim] SSP - Sender Signing [Policy | Practice | Profile] or DSP - Domain Signature Profile, Hector Santos, 07:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Jim Fenton, 06:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM Working Group Summary, IETF 65, Hector Santos, 06:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hector Santos, 06:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 00:57
March 23, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed addition to dkim-threats about hash collisions, Jim Fenton, 21:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 16:25
- [ietf-dkim] Proposed addition to dkim-threats about hash collisions, Paul Hoffman, 16:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key, Michael Thomas, 13:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 12:50
- RE: [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 12:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Douglas Otis, 10:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 10:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 10:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 09:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 09:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Douglas Otis, 09:25
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM Working Group Summary, IETF 65, DKIM Chair, 08:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 08:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 07:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Stephen Farrell, 06:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, william(at)elan.net, 04:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Mark Delany, 02:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key, Mark Delany, 01:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Mark Delany, 01:37
March 22, 2006
- [ietf-dkim] Authentication-Results discussion, Tony Hansen, 23:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 21:16
- RE: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 20:52
- RE: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 18:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 18:47
- RE: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 18:42
- RE: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 18:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Russ Housley, 17:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Russ Housley, 15:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 15:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 15:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Russ Housley, 14:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 14:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Russ Housley, 14:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 14:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Russ Housley, 14:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hector Santos, 14:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Eric Allman, 13:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 13:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 13:13
- RE: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 13:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Douglas Otis, 12:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 12:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Arvel Hathcock, 12:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM TCO, Hector Santos, 11:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Tony Hansen, 11:26
- [ietf-dkim] binary DKIM key, Douglas Otis, 11:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Jim Fenton, 11:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Douglas Otis, 10:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Russ Housley, 10:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Paul Hoffman, 10:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 10:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 09:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Dave Crocker, 09:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 09:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Paul Hoffman, 08:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Mark Delany, 08:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful - Correction, Hector Santos, 07:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Hector Santos, 07:17
March 21, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, william(at)elan.net, 23:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record, John Levine, 21:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Tony Hansen, 17:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 16:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Stephen Farrell, 16:35
- [ietf-dkim] Network Security 2006, Robert Holliday, 16:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 16:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Stephen Farrell, 15:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Douglas Otis, 15:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 15:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 14:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 14:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 14:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 13:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Jim Fenton, 13:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 13:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Douglas Otis, 13:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Stephen Farrell, 13:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Jim Fenton, 13:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Barry Leiba, 13:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, SM, 12:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal, Murray S. Kucherawy, 11:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal, Michael Thomas, 11:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal, Murray S. Kucherawy, 10:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record, Murray S. Kucherawy, 10:41
- [ietf-dkim] 1193 considered harmful, Michael Thomas, 09:48
- [ietf-dkim] Signer referenced DNS vector, Douglas Otis, 09:33
- [ietf-dkim] -base status slides (updated), Eric Allman, 09:21
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08:29
March 20, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Jim Fenton, 22:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal, Jim Fenton, 22:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record, Jim Fenton, 21:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record, Douglas Otis, 18:19
- [ietf-dkim] Jamming stuff in the selector record, Murray S. Kucherawy, 15:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Posting rights restricted to registered email address, Dave Crocker, 15:11
- [ietf-dkim] Sha/1-256, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 14:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Douglas Otis, 14:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Ólafur Guðmundsson, 13:36
- [ietf-dkim] Updated agenda ..., Stephen Farrell, 13:32
- [ietf-dkim] Signature identifier proposal, Murray S. Kucherawy, 12:55
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 12:52
- [ietf-dkim] Posting rights restricted to registered email address, Dave Crocker, 11:13
- [Fwd: EKR-3- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)], Dave Crocker, 10:06
- [Fwd: EKR2 - Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)], Dave Crocker, 10:05
- [ietf-dkim] hearing both sides of the conversation, Dave Crocker, 10:04
- [Fwd: EKR - Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1)], Dave Crocker, 09:58
- [ietf-dkim] Slides for -base discussion this afternoon, Eric Allman, 09:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Douglas Otis, 09:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Dave Crocker, 09:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Dave Crocker, 09:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Jim Fenton, 08:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Dave Crocker, 08:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Michael Thomas, 08:22
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons, Bill.Oxley, 08:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Dave Crocker, 07:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 06:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Include new "known message replay" threat?, Stephen Farrell, 05:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Stephen Farrell, 05:37
March 19, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Jim Fenton, 23:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Tony Hansen, 22:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Tony Hansen, 22:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg, Tony Hansen, 22:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Dave Crocker, 22:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Dave Crocker, 22:10
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM-related events on dkim.org home page, Dave Crocker, 13:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Douglas Otis, 11:50
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: review of threats-01, Eric Rescorla, 11:10
- [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-base-00 (1), Eric Rescorla, 11:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Paul Hoffman, 10:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Douglas Otis, 09:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Include new "known message replay" threat?, Jim Fenton, 09:21
March 18, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Mark Delany, 22:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Paul Hoffman, 20:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Russ Housley, 18:27
- Fw: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons, Hector Santos, 10:35
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons, Bill.Oxley, 08:25
March 17, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Douglas Otis, 17:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 17:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, SM, 17:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons, Hector Santos, 13:17
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons, Bill.Oxley, 12:38
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Analyzing Failures: List of Possible Reasons, Hector Santos, 12:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Arvel Hathcock, 12:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Douglas Otis, 11:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 10:42
- [ietf-dkim] If not "retailer", then...?, Dave Crocker, 10:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Russ Housley, 09:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Jeff Macdonald, 07:33
- RE: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Bill.Oxley, 07:12
March 16, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Clarify delegation to 3rd parties, Dave Crocker, 23:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, SM, 22:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Jim Fenton, 20:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., John Levine, 16:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 15:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Hector Santos, 14:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 14:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, william(at)elan.net, 14:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., william(at)elan.net, 14:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Hector Santos, 14:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Now supporting rsa-sha256, Arvel Hathcock, 14:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Arvel Hathcock, 14:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 13:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Arvel Hathcock, 13:06
- [ietf-dkim] Now supporting rsa-sha256, Murray S. Kucherawy, 12:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Barry Leiba, 12:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Douglas Otis, 12:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Paul Hoffman, 12:32
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Bill.Oxley, 12:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Michael Thomas, 12:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Paul Hoffman, 11:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 11:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 11:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 11:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Arvel Hathcock, 11:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?, Paul Hoffman, 11:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 11:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Arvel Hathcock, 11:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 10:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 10:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 10:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg, Dave Crocker, 10:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover, Dave Crocker, 10:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?, Dave Crocker, 10:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 10:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 10:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 10:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 10:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 09:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Eric Rescorla, 09:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Mark Delany, 09:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Mark Delany, 09:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Arvel Hathcock, 09:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 09:26
- [ietf-dkim] Issues status, Stephen Farrell, 09:15
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 09:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover, Stephen Farrell, 09:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Michael Thomas, 09:02
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., John L, 08:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover, Mark Delany, 08:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Stephen Farrell, 08:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?, Mark Delany, 08:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 08:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg, Stephen Farrell, 08:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Mark Delany, 08:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., John L, 08:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Michael Thomas, 08:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg, Michael Thomas, 08:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg, Stephen Farrell, 08:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Stephen Farrell, 08:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg, Michael Thomas, 08:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Michael Thomas, 08:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 08:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 07:38
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: z= field and EAI wg, Stephen Farrell, 03:07
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: selectors and key rollover, Stephen Farrell, 03:05
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Clarify delegation to 3rd parties, Stephen Farrell, 03:04
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Why is s= REQUIRED?, Stephen Farrell, 03:03
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: base editorial, Stephen Farrell, 03:00
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: some process-problematic references in base, Stephen Farrell, 02:59
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: 512 too short?, Stephen Farrell, 02:56
- [ietf-dkim] New Issues: bunch of nits for base, Stephen Farrell, 02:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Hector Santos, 00:27
March 15, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Mark Delany, 23:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Scott Kitterman, 23:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 22:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Scott Kitterman, 22:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, John Levine, 21:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., John R Levine, 20:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Arvel Hathcock, 20:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Dave Crocker, 19:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Arvel Hathcock, 19:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 19:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., John Levine, 18:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Paul Hoffman, 18:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Douglas Otis, 17:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 17:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 17:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., John Levine, 15:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, Douglas Otis, 15:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Paul Hoffman, 15:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 15:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., John Levine, 15:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, John Levine, 14:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Paul Hoffman, 14:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, J.D. Falk, 14:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, J.D. Falk, 13:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Michael Thomas, 13:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Hector Santos, 12:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Barry Leiba, 12:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Douglas Otis, 12:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, Barry Leiba, 12:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, Douglas Otis, 11:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Eliot Lear, 11:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, etc., Paul Hoffman, 10:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 10:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 10:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Steve Atkins, 10:17
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailing lists, Bill.Oxley, 10:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 09:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 09:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 09:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 09:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 09:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 09:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 09:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 09:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, John R Levine, 09:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, John Levine, 09:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 09:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 09:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 08:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 08:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Barry Leiba, 07:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, Michael Thomas, 07:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, Barry Leiba, 07:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 06:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Alan Thew, 06:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Stephen Farrell, 05:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Stephen Farrell, 05:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, Stephen Farrell, 05:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Alan Thew, 03:55
March 14, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Hector Santos, 23:16
- [ietf-dkim] 5 outstanding issues with the threat review, Douglas Otis, 21:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Mark Delany, 21:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 21:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, John Levine, 21:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists, John Levine, 21:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, william(at)elan.net, 21:04
- [ietf-dkim] Concerns about DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 19:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 19:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists, Barry Leiba, 18:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists, Michael Thomas, 15:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists, Dave Crocker, 15:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Tony Hansen, 13:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Arvel Hathcock, 12:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Jon Callas, 12:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: bunch of nits on threats-01 document, Douglas Otis, 12:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Stephen Farrell, 11:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Stephen Farrell, 11:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: bunch of nits on threats-01 document, Stephen Farrell, 10:50
- [ietf-dkim] New issue: DKIM and mailiing lists, Stephen Farrell, 10:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Jim Fenton, 06:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Barry Leiba, 06:03
March 10, 2006
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Concentrate on the threats doc, Frank Ellermann, 23:57
- [ietf-dkim] #1170 (was: WG last call on threats draft), Frank Ellermann, 23:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Mark Delany, 23:35
- [ietf-dkim] Re: ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Frank Ellermann, 23:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2, Hector Santos, 22:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2, Barry Leiba, 21:55
- [ietf-dkim] Concentrate on the threats doc, Barry Leiba, 21:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Barry Leiba, 21:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Dave Crocker, 21:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Barry Leiba, 21:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Douglas Otis, 17:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 16:24
- RE: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Nick Nicholas, 12:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, J.D. Falk, 12:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Hector Santos, 11:50
- RE: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Daniel Dreymann, 11:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Hector Santos, 10:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Hector Santos, 10:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Douglas Otis, 10:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 10:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Douglas Otis, 09:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Jeff Macdonald, 09:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Jeff Macdonald, 09:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 09:14
- RE: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Bill.Oxley, 09:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 09:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation, Mark Delany, 07:58
- RE: [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Bill.Oxley, 07:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation, Stephen Farrell, 01:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation, Jim Fenton, 00:13
March 09, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Auth-Results open discussion forum, Dave Crocker, 21:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Auth-Results open discussion forum, Scott Kitterman, 21:18
- [ietf-dkim] ABNF: Sender = Originator / Operator, Dave Crocker, 19:30
- [Asrg] Auth-Results open discussion forum, Dave Crocker, 15:30
- [ietf-dkim] Draft agenda for Dallas..., Stephen Farrell, 11:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Differences between threat-00 and threat-01, Stephen Farrell, 10:03
- [ietf-dkim] Differences between threat-00 and threat-01, Douglas Otis, 09:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] issues disposition, Dave Crocker, 09:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation, Stephen Farrell, 09:03
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: Include new "known message replay" threat?, Stephen Farrell, 08:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation, Mark Delany, 08:34
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: threats-01 over prescriptive about key delegation, Stephen Farrell, 08:11
- [ietf-dkim] New Issue: bunch of nits on threats-01 document, Stephen Farrell, 08:03
- [ietf-dkim] WG last call on threats draft, Stephen Farrell, 07:49
- [ietf-dkim] issues disposition, Stephen Farrell, 07:28
March 08, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Dave Crocker, 17:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Michael Thomas, 17:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Tony Hansen, 17:18
- [ietf-dkim] Agenda updated again, Stephen Farrell, 17:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2, Michael Thomas, 07:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Core algorithm support/use, draft text v2, Stephen Farrell, 00:44