IETF DKIM (date)
December 28, 2007
- [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Do we need SSP record for DKIM=unknown?, Frank Ellermann, 15:39
- [ietf-dkim] So...what's the current consensus?, J D Falk, 15:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Re: New Issue: Do we need SSP record for DKIM=unknown?, Hector Santos, 12:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Do we need SSP record for DKIM=unknown?, Douglas Otis, 11:27
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Re: New Issue: Do we need SSP record for DKIM=unknown?, Frank Ellermann, 06:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: New Issue: Do we need SSP record for DKIM=unknown?, Hector Santos, 02:41
December 21, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: 99.6%, Hector Santos, 21:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: 99.6%, Hector Santos, 20:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: 99.6%, Douglas Otis, 20:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: 99.6%, Michael Thomas, 17:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: 99.6%, Douglas Otis, 16:19
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Ping Doug, Douglas Otis, 12:58
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 99.6%, Michael Thomas, 08:04
- [ietf-dkim] Apologies list, Bill.Oxley, 08:02
- [ietf-dkim] Issues 1525/1426 (was Re: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics), Dave Crocker, 08:00
- [ietf-dkim] Ping Doug, Bill.Oxley, 07:55
December 20, 2007
- [ietf-dkim] off the air till after the holidays, Eliot Lear, 23:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Damon, 19:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Damon, 19:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Hector Santos, 18:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Damon, 16:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Michael Thomas, 16:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Douglas Otis, 16:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Douglas Otis, 15:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error (was: SSP assist DKIM), Damon, 14:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Damon, 14:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] draft-kucherawy-dkim-reporting-01 posted, Dave Crocker, 13:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Michael Thomas, 12:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error, Hector Santos, 11:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Jon Callas, 11:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error (was: SSP assist DKIM), Damon, 10:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Hector Santos, 09:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error (was: SSP assist DKIM), Charles Lindsey, 03:45
December 19, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error (was: SSP assist DKIM), Douglas Otis, 22:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error (was: SSP assist DKIM), Damon, 11:20
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error (was: SSP assist DKIM), Bill.Oxley, 08:24
- [ietf-dkim] Accidental versus malicous error (was: SSP assist DKIM), Wietse Venema, 08:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Charles Lindsey, 03:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Charles Lindsey, 03:26
December 18, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Eliot Lear, 23:36
- [ietf-dkim] draft-kucherawy-dkim-reporting-01 posted, Murray S. Kucherawy, 18:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Hector Santos, 14:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Steve Atkins, 13:58
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Frank Ellermann, 13:40
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", robert, 13:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Douglas Otis, 12:24
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Frank Ellermann, 12:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Damon, 11:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Hector Santos, 11:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Damon, 10:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Hector Santos, 10:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Douglas Otis, 10:20
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Frank Ellermann, 08:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1534: Applying SSP to sub-domains does not work, Eliot Lear, 00:47
December 17, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Damon, 15:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1534: Applying SSP to sub-domains does not work, Jim Fenton, 15:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Douglas Otis, 12:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Michael Thomas, 11:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Douglas Otis, 11:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Hector Santos, 03:00
December 16, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Dave Crocker, 22:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Jim Fenton, 22:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - exception, Dave Crocker, 21:08
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - exception, Bill.Oxley, 20:18
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Bill.Oxley, 20:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Michael Thomas, 12:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Hector Santos, 12:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Wietse Venema, 10:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Steve Atkins, 10:27
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1530 - replace use of term "suspicious", Dave Crocker, 10:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1534: Applying SSP to sub-domains does not work, Dave Crocker, 09:32
December 14, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Hector Santos, 23:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Hector Santos, 19:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Douglas Otis, 17:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Hector Santos, 17:01
- RE: [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Bill.Oxley, 16:07
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), John Levine, 14:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Hector Santos, 13:00
- [ietf-dkim] Re: How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Frank Ellermann, 12:27
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Dave Crocker, 11:26
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Steve Atkins, 11:23
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Michael Thomas, 11:21
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Steve Atkins, 11:01
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Dave Crocker, 10:52
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Stephen Farrell, 10:44
- Re: Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Hector Santos, 10:20
- [ietf-dkim] How SSP will assist DKIM-BASE, Hector Santos, 09:53
- Issue 1527 - Threats (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment), Dave Crocker, 09:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Jim Fenton, 09:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Dave Crocker, 09:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Wietse Venema, 07:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Process Question, Stephen Farrell, 07:04
December 13, 2007
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP'sparadigm change, Dave Crocker, 20:40
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, J D Falk, 16:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Damon, 16:16
- [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: minimal version of SSP, was Tracing ..., John Levine, 16:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, Eliot Lear, 15:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Hector Santos, 15:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Hector Santos, 15:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Hector Santos, 15:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Michael Thomas, 14:32
- [ietf-dkim] prviate review of SSP summary description draft, Dave Crocker, 14:13
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Bill.Oxley, 13:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Douglas Otis, 13:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", Dave Crocker, 13:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1535: Simplify SSP decision tree, Dave Crocker, 13:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Process Question, Dave Crocker, 13:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Wietse Venema, 11:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Hector Santos, 11:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Process Question, Hector Santos, 11:09
- RE: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filteringengine and not end-users, J D Falk, 11:09
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, Frank Ellermann, 10:50
- [ietf-dkim] Process Question, Michael Thomas, 10:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1535: Simplify SSP decision tree, Jim Fenton, 10:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, John Levine, 09:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1528: false negatives and false positives, Dave Crocker, 08:56
- [ietf-dkim] Hostile to DKIM deployment, Wietse Venema, 08:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1535: Simplify SSP decision tree, Dave Crocker, 08:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 08:16
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue 1531: "does not exist", Dave Crocker, 08:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Dave Crocker, 08:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Dave Crocker, 08:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, Dave Crocker, 07:56
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, Frank Ellermann, 07:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1535: Simplify SSP decision tree, Eliot Lear, 07:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1535: Simplify SSP decision tree, Dave Crocker, 07:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Jim Fenton, 07:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Reputation is out of scope or Define it, Eliot Lear, 07:11
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Frank Ellermann, 07:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, Eliot Lear, 06:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 06:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, Charles Lindsey, 05:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Mark Delany, 02:11
- Re: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), Jim Fenton, 01:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Jim Fenton, 01:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1534: Applying SSP to sub-domains does not work, Jim Fenton, 01:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Jim Fenton, 01:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Mark Delany, 01:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1533: strict vs. integrated, Jim Fenton, 01:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1528: false negatives and false positives, Jim Fenton, 00:39
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP'sparadigm change, Jim Fenton, 00:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Jim Fenton, 00:32
December 12, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Jim Fenton, 23:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Discussion of query traffic overhead, Jon Callas, 20:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Mark Delany, 19:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Douglas Otis, 19:30
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, J D Falk, 19:19
- RE: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] TracingSSP'sparadigm change, J D Falk, 19:16
- RE: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), J D Falk, 19:12
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", J D Falk, 19:08
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Re: Import of normative text in a standards-trackspecification, J D Falk, 19:02
- RE: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Reputation is out of scope or Define it, J D Falk, 18:55
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP'sparadigm change, Steve Atkins, 18:48
- RE: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, J D Falk, 18:43
- RE: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP threats analysis needed, J D Falk, 18:42
- RE: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP'sparadigm change, J D Falk, 18:38
- RE: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, ned+dkim, 18:08
- RE: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, J D Falk, 17:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Hector Santos, 16:02
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Frank Ellermann, 15:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Damon, 15:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Douglas Otis, 14:24
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Frank Ellermann, 12:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Jim Fenton, 10:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1532: revise list labeling, Jim Fenton, 10:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Stephen Farrell, 10:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Discussion of query traffic overhead, Jim Fenton, 10:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Change "originator" to "author", Jim Fenton, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Jim Fenton, 09:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 09:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Barry Leiba, 09:32
- Re: Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Damon, 08:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Douglas Otis, 08:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Damon, 08:09
- Fwd: Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Charles Lindsey, 05:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Stephen Farrell, 04:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: deprecate t=testing, Mark Martinec, 03:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Change "originator" to "author", Mark Martinec, 03:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1524: Signature semantics, Jim Fenton, 00:34
December 11, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Signature semantics, Jon Callas, 23:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1535: Simplify SSP decision tree, Jim Fenton, 21:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: deprecate t=testing, Jim Fenton, 21:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Jeff Macdonald, 20:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Change "originator" to "author", Jeff Macdonald, 20:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Signature semantics, John Levine, 20:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Jon Callas, 20:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Signature semantics, Jon Callas, 19:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Service Model summary, Jim Fenton, 18:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Stephen Farrell, 15:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Jon Callas, 15:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Change "originator" to "author", Douglas Otis, 15:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A whole lotta +/-1, Stephen Farrell, 15:30
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Re: NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", Frank Ellermann, 15:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1521: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Douglas Otis, 15:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., John Levine, 13:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Hector Santos, 13:37
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: deprecate t=testing, Michael Thomas, 13:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", Hector Santos, 13:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Hector Santos, 13:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", Jon Callas, 13:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Jon Callas, 13:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, John L, 13:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Jon Callas, 13:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 12:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Barry Leiba, 12:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1521: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, Michael Thomas, 12:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Jeff Macdonald, 12:16
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1521: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, Frank Ellermann, 12:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1521: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Hector Santos, 12:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Mark Martinec, 12:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Douglas Otis, 11:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 11:50
- Issue 1529 Author v. Originator (was Re: [ietf-dkim] A whole lotta +/-1), Dave Crocker, 11:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A whole lotta +/-1, Michael Thomas, 11:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 11:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Stephen Farrell, 11:25
- [ietf-dkim] A whole lotta +/-1 (was: Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls....), Frank Ellermann, 11:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues inJanuary using jabber/concalls...., Scott Kitterman, 11:05
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues inJanuary using jabber/concalls...., Bill.Oxley, 10:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Scott Kitterman, 10:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Michael Thomas, 10:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 10:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1521: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Douglas Otis, 10:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Stephen Farrell, 10:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1521: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Dave Crocker, 10:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 10:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Stephen Farrell, 10:10
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Bill.Oxley, 10:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1521: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Jim Fenton, 09:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Michael Thomas, 09:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 09:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Dave Crocker, 09:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Stephen Farrell, 09:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Michael Thomas, 09:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Dave Crocker, 09:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Eliot Lear, 08:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, John Levine, 08:57
- [ietf-dkim] Processing SSP issues in January using jabber/concalls...., Stephen Farrell, 08:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: "does not exist", Jim Fenton, 08:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Stephen Farrell, 08:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Dave Crocker, 07:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Douglas Otis, 07:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Dave Crocker, 07:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Eliot Lear, 06:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Stephen Farrell, 06:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Dave Crocker, 06:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Charles Lindsey, 05:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Stephen Farrell, 04:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Stephen Farrell, 04:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Jim Fenton, 00:12
December 10, 2007
- [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality -v2, Dave Crocker, 22:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Dave Crocker, 20:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, Tony Hansen, 20:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Arvel Hathcock, 20:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1520: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Jim Fenton, 17:51
- Re: creeping i= (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity), Jeff Macdonald, 15:10
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Frank Ellermann, 14:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Michael Thomas, 14:11
- RE: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, Bill.Oxley, 13:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Eliot Lear, 13:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1527:, Hector Santos, 13:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", Michael Thomas, 12:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Michael Thomas, 12:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Dave Crocker, 12:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Michael Thomas, 12:36
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1527:, Dave Crocker, 11:44
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1527:, Stephen Farrell, 11:34
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, Frank Ellermann, 11:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Eliot Lear, 11:31
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1527:, Dave Crocker, 11:24
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1527:, Stephen Farrell, 11:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Hector Santos, 11:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Dave Crocker, 10:54
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1527:, Dave Crocker, 10:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Dave Crocker, 10:48
- Issue #1527: (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP), Stephen Farrell, 10:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Scott Kitterman, 10:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Dave Crocker, 10:31
- [ietf-dkim] Re: process exception, Stephen Farrell, 10:29
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Frank Ellermann, 10:28
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Import of normative text in a standards-track specification, Michael Thomas, 10:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Michael Thomas, 10:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Hector Santos, 10:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Michael Thomas, 10:07
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Frank Ellermann, 10:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Scott Kitterman, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Stephen Farrell, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Dave Crocker, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Scott Kitterman, 09:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Michael Thomas, 09:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: process exception, Dave Crocker, 09:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Stephen Farrell, 09:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Scott Kitterman, 09:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Michael Thomas, 09:38
- [ietf-dkim] Import of normative text in a standards-track specification, Dave Crocker, 09:36
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: review and repair of normative vocabulary usage, Dave Crocker, 09:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Dave Crocker, 09:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Michael Thomas, 09:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Stephen Farrell, 09:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Michael Thomas, 09:19
- [ietf-dkim] process exception, Dave Crocker, 09:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Michael Thomas, 09:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Dave Crocker, 09:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Damon, 08:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, John L, 08:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: "does not exist", Dave Crocker, 08:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Damon, 08:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Scott Kitterman, 08:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Charles Lindsey, 08:34
- RE: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Bill.Oxley, 08:33
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: remove [FWS] (was: SSP Issues list), Frank Ellermann, 08:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Eliot Lear, 08:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Hector Santos, 08:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: "does not exist", Eliot Lear, 07:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Scott Kitterman, 07:37
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Reputation is out of scope or Define it, Hector Santos, 07:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Graham Murray, 07:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Wietse Venema, 06:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Hector Santos, 06:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Hector Santos, 05:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Eliot Lear, 02:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Eliot Lear, 02:42
- [ietf-dkim] SSP Issues list, Stephen Farrell, 02:41
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Frank Ellermann, 01:36
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsignedmessages, Frank Ellermann, 01:22
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Discussion of query traffic overhead, Frank Ellermann, 01:10
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Frank Ellermann, 01:02
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Change "originator" to "author", Frank Ellermann, 00:47
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", Frank Ellermann, 00:47
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: "does not exist", Frank Ellermann, 00:27
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: Applying SSP to sub-domains does not work, Frank Ellermann, 00:26
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: definition of action terms, Frank Ellermann, 00:21
December 09, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Arvel Hathcock, 21:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Scott Kitterman, 21:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Scott Kitterman, 21:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Scott Kitterman, 20:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, John Levine, 19:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Arvel Hathcock, 18:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1399: clarify i= vs. SSP, Stephen Farrell, 17:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Dave Crocker, 15:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1399: clarify i= vs. SSP, Dave Crocker, 15:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Dave Crocker, 15:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1399: clarify i= vs. SSP, Scott Kitterman, 14:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Arvel Hathcock, 13:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1399: clarify i= vs. SSP, Stephen Farrell, 13:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Jon Callas, 13:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Arvel Hathcock, 13:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Arvel Hathcock, 13:40
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: definition of action terms, Dave Crocker, 12:36
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Simplify SSP decision tree, Dave Crocker, 10:59
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Applying SSP to sub-domains does not work, Dave Crocker, 10:57
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: strict vs. integrated, Dave Crocker, 10:55
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: revise list labeling, Dave Crocker, 10:52
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: "does not exist", Dave Crocker, 10:52
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: replace use of term "suspicious", Dave Crocker, 10:45
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP threats analysis needed, Dave Crocker, 10:42
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Change "originator" to "author", Dave Crocker, 10:42
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: false negatives and false positives, Dave Crocker, 10:41
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, Dave Crocker, 10:37
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Dave Crocker, 10:29
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Signature semantics, Dave Crocker, 10:27
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Service Model summary, Dave Crocker, 10:15
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Discussion of query traffic overhead, Dave Crocker, 10:10
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Dave Crocker, 10:07
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, Dave Crocker, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Jim Fenton, 09:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 09:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue #1399: clarify i= vs. SSP, Dave Crocker, 09:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Dave Crocker, 09:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Dave Crocker, 09:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Dave Crocker, 09:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Responsibility vs. Validity, Dave Crocker, 09:33
- [ietf-dkim] The limits of DKIM and SSP, Wietse Venema, 08:10
- [ietf-dkim] Issue #1399: clarify i= vs. SSP, Stephen Farrell, 07:19
- [ietf-dkim] Re: sender practices, as opposed to something else, Frank Ellermann, 06:23
December 08, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: sender practices, as opposed to something else, Hector Santos, 22:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ready for pickup, Dave Crocker, 21:12
- [ietf-dkim] Re: sender practices, as opposed to something else, Frank Ellermann, 20:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Michael Thomas, 19:21
- [ietf-dkim] A/R Trust Services, Hector Santos, 18:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] sender practices, as opposed to something else, Hector Santos, 17:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] sender practices, as opposed to something else, Wietse Venema, 16:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Hector Santos, 16:49
- [ietf-dkim] ready for pickup, Dave Crocker, 16:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Dave Crocker, 16:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] sender practices, as opposed to something else, Hector Santos, 11:50
December 07, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Michael Thomas, 15:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Michael Thomas, 15:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Steve Atkins, 15:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Michael Thomas, 15:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Jim Fenton, 14:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] sender practices, as opposed to something else, Wietse Venema, 13:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Eric Allman, 13:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Scott Kitterman, 13:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Hector Santos, 12:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Dave Crocker, 12:53
- [ietf-dkim] sender practices, as opposed to something else, John Levine, 12:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Steve Atkins, 12:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Eric Allman, 12:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Michael Thomas, 11:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Scott Kitterman, 11:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Hector Santos, 11:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Steve Atkins, 11:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Dave Crocker, 11:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Michael Thomas, 11:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Steve Atkins, 11:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Scott Kitterman, 11:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Steve Atkins, 11:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Jim Fenton, 11:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Steve Atkins, 10:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Scott Kitterman, 10:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Scott Kitterman, 10:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Steve Atkins, 10:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Steve Atkins, 10:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, Scott Kitterman, 10:25
- [ietf-dkim] Re: reductio ad hominem, John Levine, 10:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: suspicious terminology, Dave Crocker, 09:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: suspicious terminology, Michael Thomas, 09:44
- [ietf-dkim] "no mail" (was: Next-generation SPF cabal), Frank Ellermann, 09:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Next-generation SPF cabal, Hector Santos, 09:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Scott Kitterman, 09:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Dave Crocker, 08:55
- [ietf-dkim] Re: A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Frank Ellermann, 08:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Michael Thomas, 08:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Next-generation SPF cabal, Scott Kitterman, 08:37
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Next-generation SPF cabal, Bill.Oxley, 08:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Dave Crocker, 08:17
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Bill.Oxley, 08:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Putting away the SSP Crystal Ball, Scott Kitterman, 08:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Michael Thomas, 07:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Putting away the SSP Crystal Ball, Dave Crocker, 07:39
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Dave Crocker, 07:30
- [ietf-dkim] Next-generation SPF cabal, Patrick Peterson, 04:24
- [ietf-dkim] Discussing what someone said about SSP - productive?, Patrick Peterson, 04:23
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Patrick Peterson, 04:12
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Patrick Peterson, 03:48
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Patrick Peterson, 03:46
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Patrick Peterson, 03:40
- [ietf-dkim] Does nobody or everybody want SSP?, Patrick Peterson, 03:38
- [ietf-dkim] Putting away the SSP Crystal Ball, Patrick Peterson, 03:34
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Hector Santos, 02:04
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 01:29
December 06, 2007
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 23:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Hector Santos, 23:41
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Scott Kitterman, 23:41
- Re: threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 22:48
- threat modeling & use cases (was RE: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, J D Falk, 22:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, John Levine, 21:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Scott Kitterman, 19:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Scott Kitterman, 19:26
- [ietf-dkim] A perspective on what SSP is attempting, Dave Crocker, 19:23
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue tracker URL, Eliot Lear, 18:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, John L, 18:19
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Frank Ellermann, 18:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Jim Fenton, 18:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: suspicious terminology, Jim Fenton, 18:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Jim Fenton, 17:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 17:13
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Frank Ellermann, 17:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 13:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Hector Santos, 13:05
- Issue #1513, (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality), Stephen Farrell, 12:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Dave Crocker, 12:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Michael Thomas, 12:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Michael Thomas, 12:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Douglas Otis, 12:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 11:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Arvel Hathcock, 11:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Hector Santos, 11:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Scott Kitterman, 11:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Wietse Venema, 11:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 11:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Scott Kitterman, 11:01
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Signal to noise ratio, Bill.Oxley, 10:59
- [ietf-dkim] Re: NEW ISSUE: suspicious terminology, Arvel Hathcock, 10:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Scott Kitterman, 10:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 10:54
- [ietf-dkim] -overview and -deployment html and pdf versions, Dave Crocker, 10:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Dave Crocker, 10:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 10:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Michael Thomas, 10:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Steve Atkins, 10:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: suspicious terminology, Michael Thomas, 10:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Michael Thomas, 10:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Michael Thomas, 10:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Dave Crocker, 09:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Michael Thomas, 09:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 09:46
- [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: suspicious terminology, John Levine, 09:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Michael Thomas, 09:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Tony Finch, 08:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Scott Kitterman, 07:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Charles Lindsey, 05:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Hector Santos, 01:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Arvel Hathcock, 00:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Arvel Hathcock, 00:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Dave Crocker, 00:14
December 05, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Arvel Hathcock, 22:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Arvel Hathcock, 21:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE 1519: SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict", Douglas Otis, 21:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Arvel Hathcock, 21:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] making SSP useless in one short step, Arvel Hathcock, 20:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Arvel Hathcock, 20:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Arvel Hathcock, 20:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 20:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, John Levine, 20:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Arvel Hathcock, 19:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Dave Crocker, 19:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Arvel Hathcock, 19:37
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Michael Thomas, 19:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Jim Fenton, 18:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE 1519: SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict"// edits, Jim Fenton, 18:25
- [ietf-dkim] Issue #1512: Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Jim Fenton, 18:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE 1519: SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict", Jim Fenton, 18:21
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1519] [Comment] SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict" // correction, Douglas Otis, 16:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Michael Thomas, 15:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] making SSP useless in one short step, Scott Kitterman, 15:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Scott Kitterman, 14:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict", Scott Kitterman, 14:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Scott Kitterman, 14:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Hector Santos, 14:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, John Levine, 14:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Hector Santos, 14:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Dave Crocker, 14:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Dave Crocker, 13:58
- [ietf-dkim] OT: apps-review (was: making SSP useless in one short step), Frank Ellermann, 13:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Hector Santos, 13:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Steve Dorner, 13:17
- [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict"// edits, Douglas Otis, 13:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Tony Finch, 12:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Tony Finch, 12:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 12:41
- [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Michael Thomas, 12:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] making SSP useless in one short step, Michael Thomas, 12:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] making SSP useless in one short step, John Levine, 12:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict", Eliot Lear, 12:21
- [ietf-dkim] Re: making SSP useless in one short step, Dave Crocker, 12:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Steve Atkins, 12:02
- [ietf-dkim] making SSP useless in one short step, Michael Thomas, 11:48
- [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: SSP-01 Unnecessary constraint on i= when asserting "strict", Douglas Otis, 11:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Dave Crocker, 11:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Dave Crocker, 11:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Mark Martinec, 11:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Michael Thomas, 11:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Steve Atkins, 11:20
- [ietf-dkim] Draft summary of SSP functionality, Dave Crocker, 11:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Dave Crocker, 10:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Mark Martinec, 08:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Scott Kitterman, 07:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), John Levine, 06:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Scott Kitterman, 06:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Charles Lindsey, 06:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Charles Lindsey, 06:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices(draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Charles Lindsey, 06:03
December 04, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Comments on SSP Review BASIC ISSUES, Douglas Otis, 20:45
- [ietf-dkim] Issue tracking for SSP, Stephen Farrell, 20:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Michael Thomas, 19:15
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Comments on SSP Review BASIC ISSUES, Patrick Peterson, 19:03
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs.Validity), Frank Ellermann, 18:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Hector Santos, 18:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Scott Kitterman, 17:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), ned+dkim, 17:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Comments on SSP Review BASIC ISSUES, Steve Atkins, 17:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Hector Santos, 17:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Pete Resnick, 16:54
- [ietf-dkim] Comments on SSP Review BASIC ISSUES, Arvel Hathcock, 16:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 16:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 16:27
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, J D Falk, 16:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Jim Fenton, 15:32
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Michael Thomas, 15:22
- [ietf-dkim] Tracing SSP's paradigm change, Dave Crocker, 15:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Hector Santos, 14:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Eric Allman, 13:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Michael Thomas, 12:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), John L, 12:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Mark Martinec, 12:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Michael Thomas, 12:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), John L, 12:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Douglas Otis, 12:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Hector Santos, 12:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Michael Thomas, 12:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Douglas Otis, 12:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Eliot Lear, 11:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), John L, 11:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Hector Santos, 11:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Wietse Venema, 11:32
- RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, J D Falk, 11:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Jim Fenton, 11:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Hector Santos, 10:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Michael Thomas, 10:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), John Levine, 10:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Hector Santos, 10:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Michael Thomas, 10:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Michael Thomas, 09:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Douglas Otis, 09:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Michael Thomas, 09:49
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices(draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), J D Falk, 09:35
- RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, J D Falk, 09:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Wietse Venema, 08:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Hector Santos, 07:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Hector Santos, 06:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Charles Lindsey, 06:07
- RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Patrick Peterson, 03:47
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices(draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Patrick Peterson, 03:47
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices(draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Patrick Peterson, 03:47
- [ietf-dkim] Re: SSP sender expectations, Frank Ellermann, 01:47
December 03, 2007
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, Scott Kitterman, 23:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP sender expectations, John Levine, 22:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Scott Kitterman, 21:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), John Levine, 21:25
- [ietf-dkim] Review of DKIM Sender Signing Practices (draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01), Dave Crocker, 16:38
- [ietf-dkim] Updated agenda for tomorrow, Stephen Farrell, 15:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Douglas Otis, 11:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Dave Crocker, 10:11
- RE: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Bill.Oxley, 09:28
December 01, 2007
- Re: Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Frank Ellermann, 14:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, John Levine, 11:42
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Frank Ellermann, 10:59
- RFC2821 Implementation Survey, Dave Crocker, 09:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Dave Crocker, 09:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), John Levine, 08:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender, Hector Santos, 07:01
- [ietf-dkim] Mailing lists as 2822-Sender (was: Responsibility vs. Validity), Frank Ellermann, 05:12