IETF DKIM (date)
April 30, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Eric Rescorla, 18:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Michael Thomas, 18:22
- RE: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Bill.Oxley, 17:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Eric Rescorla, 13:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Paul Hoffman, 13:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Eric Rescorla, 12:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Michael Thomas, 12:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, william(at)elan.net, 12:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Michael Thomas, 12:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Tony Hansen, 11:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Eric Rescorla, 11:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Paul Hoffman, 11:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Eric Rescorla, 11:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, william(at)elan.net, 10:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Hector Santos, 09:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Hector Santos, 09:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Dave Crocker, 08:57
- [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Paul Hoffman, 08:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Paul Hoffman, 08:44
- [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Tony Hansen, 05:54
April 29, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Dave Crocker, 21:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Dave Crocker, 21:11
- [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Paul Hoffman, 17:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, John R Levine, 16:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Douglas Otis, 15:06
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: ABNF discrepancies, SUZUKI Takahiko, 13:01
- [ietf-dkim] Re: What the verifier can do, Dave Crocker, 12:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-base-01 nits and semi-nits, Dave Crocker, 12:32
- What the verifier can do (was: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers ), Paul Hoffman, 12:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Dave Crocker, 12:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Paul Hoffman, 12:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, John L, 11:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Douglas Otis, 11:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Douglas Otis, 10:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, John Levine, 07:58
April 28, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Eliot Lear, 23:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Douglas Otis, 18:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Michael Thomas, 18:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-base-01 nits and semi-nits, Mark Delany, 18:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, J.D. Falk, 18:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-base-01 nits and semi-nits, Douglas Otis, 17:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Douglas Otis, 17:51
- [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-base-01 nits and semi-nits, Eric Allman, 17:28
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01 nits and semi-nits, Jim Fenton, 16:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Hector Santos, 16:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Douglas Otis, 15:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Stephen Farrell, 15:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Michael Thomas, 14:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Eric Allman, 14:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Hector Santos, 14:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Mark Delany, 14:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Dave Crocker, 14:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Tony Hansen, 14:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Tony Hansen, 14:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Dave Crocker, 13:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Michael Thomas, 13:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, william(at)elan.net, 13:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Jim Fenton, 13:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Michael Thomas, 13:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Eric Allman, 13:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, william(at)elan.net, 13:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Eric Allman, 13:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Eric Allman, 13:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Eric Allman, 13:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Hector Santos, 13:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Eric Allman, 12:37
- [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices, Douglas Otis, 10:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Arvel Hathcock, 08:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Michael Thomas, 06:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, william(at)elan.net, 05:32
April 27, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Tony Hansen, 19:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Arvel Hathcock, 19:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Michael Thomas, 17:47
- [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers, Arvel Hathcock, 17:35
- [ietf-dkim] Re: dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Eric Allman, 14:30
April 26, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Mark Delany, 20:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, Douglas Otis, 17:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, J.D. Falk, 17:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Jim Fenton, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, Michael Thomas, 16:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, Scott Kitterman, 16:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, Douglas Otis, 15:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Mark Delany, 13:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Michael Thomas, 13:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, william(at)elan.net, 12:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, J.D. Falk, 12:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Hector Santos, 12:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Hector Santos, 11:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Douglas Otis, 10:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Eliot Lear, 09:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Hector Santos, 09:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Eliot Lear, 09:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Douglas Otis, 08:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Michael Thomas, 06:30
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim, Hector Santos, 04:48
April 25, 2006
- [ietf-dkim] Fw: I-D ACTION:draft-santos-dkim-rcvd-00.txt, Hector Santos, 18:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Paul Hoffman, 15:38
- [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain, Douglas Otis, 15:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Jon Callas, 14:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date, Jon Callas, 14:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Jim Fenton, 14:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Paul Hoffman, 12:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, Jeff Macdonald, 12:07
- [ietf-dkim] Binary algorithms and algorithm spoofing during a transition., Douglas Otis, 10:18
- [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections, Douglas Otis, 09:30
- [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support, Douglas Otis, 09:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] t=y is ugly and critical tagsb, Mark Delany, 07:19
April 24, 2006
- [ietf-dkim] t=y is ugly and critical tagsb, Amir Herzberg, 23:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date, Michael Thomas, 17:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date, Douglas Otis, 17:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date, Paul Hoffman, 17:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date, Michael Thomas, 17:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date, Paul Hoffman, 16:12
- [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date, Jim Fenton, 15:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Jim Fenton, 13:18
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal to address Expiration Issue: Partial DKIM Verificaton Support, Hector Santos, 10:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] question on _domainkey prefix to DNS query (and record), Douglas Otis, 10:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Hector Santos, 10:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Douglas Otis, 09:42
- [ietf-dkim] question on _domainkey prefix to DNS query (and record), Amir Herzberg, 05:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Hector Santos, 04:34
April 22, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag, Michael Thomas, 09:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag, Mircea Purdea, 09:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag, Stephen Farrell, 09:00
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag, Mircea Purdea, 08:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag, Stephen Farrell, 08:33
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag, Mircea Purdea, 07:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, John Levine, 06:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Hector Santos, 06:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Hector Santos, 05:53
- RE: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Bill.Oxley, 05:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Sandy Wills, 05:34
April 21, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, John Levine, 23:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Eliot Lear, 21:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Hector Santos, 21:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Hector Santos, 20:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=, Arvel Hathcock, 20:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Jim Fenton, 18:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Dave Crocker, 17:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Jim Fenton, 17:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification in MUAs, Hector Santos, 14:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification in MUAs, Paul Hoffman, 12:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification in MUAs, Hector Santos, 11:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Hector Santos, 11:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification in MUAs, Michael Thomas, 10:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Hector Santos, 10:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Michael Thomas, 10:15
- [ietf-dkim] Next jabber slot May 4th, Stephen Farrell, 10:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Douglas Otis, 09:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Paul Hoffman, 09:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Mark Delany, 09:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification in MUAs, John Levine, 09:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Michael Thomas, 09:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Paul Hoffman, 08:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Sandy Wills, 08:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Hector Santos, 08:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Michael Thomas, 07:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Sandy Wills, 06:27
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM verification actors, Michael Thomas, 06:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=, Michael Thomas, 06:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, Stephen Farrell, 04:49
April 20, 2006
- [ietf-dkim] x= date format and support logic, Hector Santos, 23:26
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 21:12
- [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006, DKIM Chair, 20:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=, Douglas Otis, 20:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Douglas Otis, 19:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=, ned+dkim, 18:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=, Tony Hansen, 18:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Scott Kitterman, 18:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Hector Santos, 17:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Format for t=, Douglas Otis, 17:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Douglas Otis, 16:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Michael Thomas, 16:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Michael Thomas, 15:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, william(at)elan.net, 12:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, william(at)elan.net, 12:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Douglas Otis, 11:59
- [ietf-dkim] Expiry based upon Received Time rather than Current time., Douglas Otis, 11:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Jon Callas, 11:43
- [ietf-dkim] Section 5.2 move recommendations for key retention to a BCP, Douglas Otis, 11:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Mark Delany, 11:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, william(at)elan.net, 10:25
- [ietf-dkim] sysadmin says:, Stephen Farrell, 08:31
- [ietf-dkim] Jabber room problems, Barry Leiba, 08:20
- [ietf-dkim] jabber fun, Stephen Farrell, 08:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Mark Delany, 07:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Scott Kitterman, 07:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Douglas Otis, 07:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Douglas Otis, 06:58
- [ietf-dkim] Today's jabber., Stephen Farrell, 05:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Scott Kitterman, 05:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Hector Santos, 05:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Hector Santos, 04:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Jim Fenton, 01:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Jim Fenton, 01:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Jim Fenton, 01:16
April 19, 2006
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Bill.Oxley, 23:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Hector Santos, 23:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Hector Santos, 21:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x= with DSN considerations, Douglas Otis, 16:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x= with DSN considerations, Scott Kitterman, 16:18
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x= with DSN considerations, Bill.Oxley, 15:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, John Levine, 15:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x= with DSN considerations, Douglas Otis, 15:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Michael Thomas, 13:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Hector Santos, 13:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 13:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Eliot Lear, 12:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Paul Hoffman, 12:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 12:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 12:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Stephen Farrell, 12:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Stephen Farrell, 12:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Jon Callas, 12:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Hector Santos, 11:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Hector Santos, 11:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Paul Hoffman, 10:16
- [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=, Stephen Farrell, 08:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 01:38
April 18, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 21:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Collecting SMTP delivery data., Hector Santos, 20:45
- [ietf-dkim] Collecting SMTP delivery data., Lyndon Nerenberg, 20:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 20:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Lyndon Nerenberg, 19:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 19:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Lyndon Nerenberg, 19:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 19:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 18:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 17:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 17:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Michael Thomas, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 16:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 15:48
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Paul Hoffman, 15:43
- [ietf-dkim] Re: [dkim-dev] Clarifications on draft-ietf-dkim-base-01, Eric Allman, 15:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Michael Thomas, 15:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: authentication result headers are an unsafe alternative, Stephen Farrell, 15:01
- Re: [dkim-dev] Clarifications on draft-ietf-dkim-base-01, Tony Hansen, 14:57
- [ietf-dkim] Re: authentication result headers are an unsafe alternative, Murray S. Kucherawy, 14:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Stephen Farrell, 14:39
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Bill.Oxley, 14:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Paul Hoffman, 14:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 14:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 14:23
- Re: [dkim-dev] Clarifications on draft-ietf-dkim-base-01, Murray S. Kucherawy, 14:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Douglas Otis, 14:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Stephen Farrell, 14:08
- Re: [dkim-dev] Clarifications on draft-ietf-dkim-base-01, Tony Hansen, 14:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Stephen Farrell, 13:45
- [dkim-dev] Clarifications on draft-ietf-dkim-base-01, Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side benifit, Scott Kitterman, 13:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimizeDNSlookups., Hector Santos, 13:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] authentication result headers are an unsafe alternative, Douglas Otis, 12:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 2.1 Signers // Within an administrative domain?, Douglas Otis, 12:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Hector Santos, 12:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Scott Kitterman, 11:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] authentication result headers are an unsafe alternative, Scott Kitterman, 11:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] authentication result headers are an unsafe alternative, Douglas Otis, 11:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNSlookups., Steve Atkins, 11:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Tony Hansen, 11:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNSlookups., Hector Santos, 10:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Scott Kitterman, 10:58
- RE: [ietf-dkim] 2.1 Signers // Within an administrative domain?, Bill.Oxley, 10:51
- [ietf-dkim] 2.1 Signers // Within an administrative domain?, Douglas Otis, 10:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Jim Fenton, 10:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNS lookups., Paul Hoffman, 10:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Stephen Farrell, 10:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNS lookups., Steve Atkins, 10:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNS lookups., Hector Santos, 09:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNSlookups., Hector Santos, 09:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Douglas Otis, 09:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNS lookups., Paul Hoffman, 08:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNS lookups., Mark Delany, 07:44
- [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNS lookups., Hector Santos, 03:44
April 17, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 23:28
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Bill.Oxley, 20:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Paul Hoffman, 19:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Jon Callas, 18:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Jim Fenton, 17:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Paul Hoffman, 16:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Douglas Otis, 16:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Dave Crocker, 16:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Paul Hoffman, 15:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Jon Callas, 14:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Douglas Otis, 13:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Jon Callas, 12:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Jon Callas, 11:37
- [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: IETF Jabber server changes], Stephen Farrell, 09:11
April 14, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 20:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, John Levine, 14:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Service model options for an ISP, Jim Fenton, 13:17
- {Blocked Content} [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-base-01.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Douglas Otis, 12:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Stephen Farrell, 12:09
- RE: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Bill.Oxley, 11:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Arvel Hathcock, 11:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Michael Thomas, 11:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Arvel Hathcock, 11:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Dave Crocker, 11:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Michael Thomas, 11:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Steve Atkins, 11:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Dave Crocker, 11:14
- RE: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Bill.Oxley, 10:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Paul Hoffman, 10:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 10:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Hector Santos, 10:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Douglas Otis, 09:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, John Levine, 09:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Paul Hoffman, 08:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Hector Santos, 08:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Eliot Lear, 07:51
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error, Hector Santos, 07:42
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 06:45
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key, Hector Santos, 06:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Service model options for an ISP, Michael Thomas, 06:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 06:04
- [ietf-dkim] x= date format yyyymmddhhss, Hector Santos, 01:53
April 13, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Mark Delany, 21:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Tony Hansen, 20:53
- [ietf-dkim] Service model options for an ISP, Mark Delany, 19:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Jim Hill, 18:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains, Mark Delany, 16:44
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains, Bill.Oxley, 16:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains, Jim Fenton, 15:53
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Improtant legal precedent, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 13:45
- [ietf-dkim] Improtant legal precedent, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 13:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-base-01 submitted, Dave Crocker, 12:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Arvel Hathcock, 12:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-base-01 submitted, Stephen Farrell, 12:22
- [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-base-01 submitted, Mircea Purdea, 12:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Stephen Farrell, 12:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Douglas Otis, 11:55
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 11:33
- RE: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Miles libbey, 10:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 10:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Douglas Otis, 10:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, Michael Thomas, 10:02
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-01 submitted, Eric Allman, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, william(at)elan.net, 09:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 09:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Douglas Otis, 09:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Mark Delany, 09:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, John R Levine, 08:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 08:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, Stephen Farrell, 08:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, John L, 07:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, Stephen Farrell, 07:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, John R Levine, 07:37
- RE: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 07:29
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains, Douglas Otis, 06:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, Hector Santos, 05:58
- RE: [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains, Bill.Oxley, 05:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, Stephen Farrell, 03:18
April 12, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, Lyndon Nerenberg, 22:47
- [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general, John L, 22:29
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Dennis Dayman, 18:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains, John Levine, 18:12
- [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains, Jim Fenton, 17:38
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Bill.Oxley, 17:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x= (vote change!), Jim Fenton, 17:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Jim Fenton, 17:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Murray S. Kucherawy, 16:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Mark Delany, 15:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Stephen Farrell, 15:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Michael Thomas, 14:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Murray S. Kucherawy, 14:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Murray S. Kucherawy, 14:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Douglas Otis, 14:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, william(at)elan.net, 13:40
- [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description, Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 12:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Hector Santos, 12:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 11:19
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Why I think there's something wrong with Expiration, Hector Santos, 10:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hector Santos, 09:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Dave Crocker, 09:46
- RE: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Paul Hoffman, 09:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 09:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM: transit-only?, Dave Crocker, 08:13
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM: transit-only?, Jonathan Clark, 08:06
- RE: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, william(at)elan.net, 07:55
- [ietf-dkim] On-line Registration Closing Sunday, Robert Holliday, 07:24
- RE: [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 05:46
- [ietf-dkim] Why I think there's something wrong with Expiration, Eliot Lear, 04:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM-BASE-00: Proposed Expiration Tag (x=)Description Change, Hector Santos, 03:49
April 11, 2006
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility, Mark Delany, 23:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Eliot Lear, 22:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM-BASE-00: Proposed Expiration Tag (x=)Description Change, Eliot Lear, 22:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Straw poll on x=, Hector Santos, 22:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Dave Crocker, 21:16
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Straw poll on x=, Mark Delany, 20:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Mark Delany, 20:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Mark Delany, 20:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 19:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Michael Thomas, 18:39
- Re[2]: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Jonathan Clark, 18:32
- Re[2]: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Jonathan Clark, 18:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John L, 18:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Dave Crocker, 17:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Dave Crocker, 17:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Dave Crocker, 17:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Jim Fenton, 17:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Jim Fenton, 17:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Hector Santos, 16:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 16:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 16:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Michael Thomas, 16:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Stephen Farrell, 16:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 16:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Dave Crocker, 16:06
- Re[2]: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Jonathan Clark, 16:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Stephen Farrell, 15:14
- Re[2]: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Jonathan Clark, 15:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 15:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Stephen Farrell, 14:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Stephen Farrell, 14:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Douglas Otis, 14:14
- Re[2]: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Jonathan Clark, 14:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 14:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Michael Thomas, 13:54
- [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?, Dave Crocker, 13:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Paul Hoffman, 13:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//[various topics], Stephen Farrell, 13:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, william(at)elan.net, 12:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM-BASE-00: Proposed Expiration Tag (x=)Description Change, Mark Delany, 12:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Mark Delany, 12:41
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Dennis Dayman, 10:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 10:10
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, william(at)elan.net, 09:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Douglas Otis, 08:48
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Bill.Oxley, 08:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Hector Santos, 08:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Hector Santos, 08:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Michael Thomas, 08:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, John Levine, 08:25
- [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Jonathan Clark, 08:17
- [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=, Stephen Farrell, 07:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 07:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 07:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John R Levine, 07:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 07:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John R Levine, 07:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] proposal: retain x=, Michael Thomas, 06:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 06:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, william(at)elan.net, 06:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John L, 06:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM-BASE-00: Proposed Expiration Tag (x=)Description Change, Hector Santos, 04:19
April 10, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Jim Fenton, 22:56
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Bill.Oxley, 22:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM-BASE-00: Proposed Expiration Tag (x=) Description Change, Mark Delany, 22:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Mark Delany, 22:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Dave Crocker, 21:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John R Levine, 20:54
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM-BASE-00: Proposed Expiration Tag (x=) Description Change, Hector Santos, 20:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 19:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//[various topics], Douglas Otis, 16:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//[various topics], Stephen Farrell, 14:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//[various topics], Douglas Otis, 12:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Jim Fenton, 11:46
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:16
April 08, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] proposal: retain x=, John Levine, 21:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John Levine, 21:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] proposal: retain x=, Michael Thomas, 19:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] proposal: retain x=, Mark Delany, 19:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Updated proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 18:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Dave Crocker, 18:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Updated proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 17:56
- [ietf-dkim] proposal: retain x=, Michael Thomas, 17:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Updated proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 16:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Updated proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 16:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Updated proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 16:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Arvel Hathcock, 16:10
- [ietf-dkim] Updated proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 10:11
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 09:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Eliot Lear, 08:36
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Bill.Oxley, 07:10
April 07, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Hector Santos, 17:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 17:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 15:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 15:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 14:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Stephen Farrell, 14:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 13:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 13:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 13:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, william(at)elan.net, 12:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 12:04
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Douglas Otis, 09:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 09:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 08:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Stephen Farrell, 08:53
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Bill.Oxley, 08:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Dave Crocker, 08:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Stephen Farrell, 08:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 08:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Stephen Farrell, 07:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 07:07
April 06, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Stephen Farrell, 18:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, John Levine, 18:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Michael Thomas, 17:29
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=, Paul Hoffman, 17:15
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Affects verification of messages?, Douglas Otis, 13:10
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Claim Responsibility for email address use?, Douglas Otis, 12:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Permitted and preferred algorithms., Stephen Farrell, 12:33
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Packet Amplification, Douglas Otis, 12:26
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Message replay impact rating, Douglas Otis, 12:21
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Affects verification of messages?, Douglas Otis, 12:14
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Claim Responsibility for email address use?, Douglas Otis, 12:13
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Permitted and preferred algorithms., Douglas Otis, 12:06
- [ietf-dkim] jabber meeting announce - April 20th, 1600 (Dublin), Stephen Farrell, 10:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issues: bunch of nits for base, Stephen Farrell, 00:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP, Stephen Farrell, 00:32
April 05, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issues: bunch of nits for base, Eric Allman, 20:55
- [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 4.1.9. Body Length Limit Abuse - MUA mitigation, Hector Santos, 19:59
- [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP, Hector Santos, 18:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP, Rob Siemborski, 18:47
- [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP, Hector Santos, 18:42
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, SM, 15:05
- {Blocked Content} [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:52
- [ietf-dkim] Dallas meeting minutes accepted., DKIM Chair, 11:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 10:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 10:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 10:16
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Bill.Oxley, 10:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Arvel Hathcock, 10:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 09:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Arvel Hathcock, 09:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Arvel Hathcock, 04:53
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal change to 3.6.1 t=y Description, Hector Santos, 00:21
April 04, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 19:08
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Dennis Dayman, 18:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 16:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 15:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 15:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 15:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 15:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 15:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 15:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 14:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Eric Rescorla, 14:15
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Bill.Oxley, 13:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 13:53
- [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 13:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 12:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 11:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 11:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 10:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 10:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Eric Rescorla, 10:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 10:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 10:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 10:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 10:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 09:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 09:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 09:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 09:31
- [mtcc.com alert] Re: [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 09:18
- [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 09:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 08:49
April 03, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 15:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Eric Rescorla, 13:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 12:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Arvel Hathcock, 10:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Arvel Hathcock, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax andsemanticsformultiple signatures, Hector Santos, 07:21
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax andsemanticsformultiple signatures, Bill.Oxley, 07:05
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semanticsformultiple signatures, Bill.Oxley, 06:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 05:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax andsemantics formultiple signatures, Hector Santos, 05:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Barry Leiba, 05:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semanticsformultiple signatures, Barry Leiba, 05:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax andsemanticsformultiple signatures, Hector Santos, 05:35
April 02, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semanticsformultiple signatures, Hector Santos, 10:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Steve Atkins, 09:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 09:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Barry Leiba, 08:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Eric Rescorla, 06:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 06:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Michael Thomas, 06:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 04:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Hector Santos, 01:38
April 01, 2006
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 23:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Barry Leiba, 22:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Eric Rescorla, 21:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Mark Delany, 19:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Dave Crocker, 19:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Stephen Farrell, 18:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Hector Santos, 17:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Hector Santos, 17:13
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics formultiple signatures, Bill.Oxley, 15:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Douglas Otis, 13:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for multiple signatures, Paul Hoffman, 10:17