RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status

ietf-dkim

RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status

2008-01-15 16:11:16

Jim Fenton wrote:

I penciled in the meetings when they were originally proposed, not
sure why this is a surprise to people.  January
3 and 10 got cancelled for various reasons (proximity to the holidays
and lack of 30-day notice, I
think) but the rest are still there.


Could you recap the dates & times that weren't cancelled?


_______________________________________________
NOTE WELL: This list operates according to 
http://mipassoc.org/dkim/ietf-list-rules.html

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: remove [FWS] (was: SSP issues status), (continued) Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: remove [FWS] (was: SSP issues status), Charles Lindsey Re: [ietf-dkim] NEW ISSUE: remove [FWS], Michael Thomas [ietf-dkim] ISSUE 1521 -- Limit the application of SSP to unsigned messages, Dave Crocker Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Barry Leiba Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Dave Crocker RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, J D Falk Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Steve Atkins Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, John Levine Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Eliot Lear Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Jim Fenton RE: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, J D Falk <= Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Jim Fenton Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Dave Crocker

Previous by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: ISSUE 1525 -- Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, Jim Fenton
Next by Date:	Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Jim Fenton
Previous by Thread:	Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Jim Fenton
Next by Thread:	Re: [ietf-dkim] SSP issues status, Jim Fenton
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]