IETF DKIM (date)
April 30, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why only exact domains matter, Bill.Oxley, 23:56
- [ietf-dkim] Why only exact domains matter, John Levine, 19:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why only exact domains matter, Arvel Hathcock, 19:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Douglas Otis, 18:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Arvel Hathcock, 17:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Al Iverson, 17:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Al Iverson, 17:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Arvel Hathcock, 17:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Al Iverson, 17:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Dave Crocker, 17:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Wietse Venema, 16:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Arvel Hathcock, 16:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Arvel Hathcock, 16:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Douglas Otis, 15:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Dave Crocker, 15:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), Arvel Hathcock, 15:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] NXDOMAIN vs positive existence of hostname or MX records., Douglas Otis, 14:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Dave Crocker, 13:31
- [ietf-dkim] forward movement, please? (was RE: Are lookalike domains like parent domains?), J D Falk, 13:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Steve Atkins, 13:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Al Iverson, 13:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Arvel Hathcock, 13:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 13:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Steve Atkins, 12:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 12:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Arvel Hathcock, 12:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Steve Atkins, 11:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Arvel Hathcock, 11:42
- [ietf-dkim] end-users vs filtering engines, Dave Crocker, 11:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 10:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Section 3.1 - ASP Usage, Bill.Oxley, 10:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Stephen Farrell, 08:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, Arvel Hathcock, 08:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are lookalike domains like parent domains?, John Levine, 06:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Section 3.1 - ASP Usage, Wietse Venema, 06:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Pasi(_dot_)Eronen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com, 02:49
April 29, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Section 3.1 - ASP Usage, SM, 17:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Section 3.1 - ASP Usage, Douglas Otis, 16:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, J D Falk, 14:53
- [ietf-dkim] Section 3.1 - ASP Usage, SM, 14:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Douglas Otis, 14:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Arvel Hathcock, 14:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mipassoc.org is dkim signing, Frank Ellermann, 14:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Arvel Hathcock, 14:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 13:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, J D Falk, 12:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mipassoc.org is dkim signing, Tony Hansen, 11:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Steve Atkins, 11:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] mipassoc.org is dkim signing, Al Iverson, 11:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 11:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Wietse Venema, 11:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Douglas Otis, 11:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, SM, 11:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, J D Falk, 10:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, J D Falk, 10:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 10:01
- [ietf-dkim] mipassoc.org is dkim signing, Dave Crocker, 09:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Eliot Lear, 09:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 09:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, John Levine, 09:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 09:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Dave Crocker, 09:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Steve Atkins, 08:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Eliot Lear, 08:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, John Levine, 08:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 08:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, John Levine, 08:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, John Levine, 08:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Dave Crocker, 08:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Al Iverson, 07:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Steve Atkins, 07:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Eliot Lear, 04:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, Charles Lindsey, 03:21
April 28, 2008
- [ietf-dkim] Are subdomains like parent domains?, John Levine, 18:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Jim Fenton, 12:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Steve Atkins, 11:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Al Iverson, 10:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Douglas Otis, 10:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, J D Falk, 09:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 08:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Al Iverson, 07:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Charles Lindsey, 03:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] climbing the domain tree, Douglas Otis, 02:03
April 25, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 18:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Douglas Otis, 17:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Jim Fenton, 16:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 16:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Eliot Lear, 10:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Douglas Otis, 10:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 09:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Eliot Lear, 01:14
April 16, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Frank Ellermann, 19:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Douglas Otis, 16:34
- [ietf-dkim] getting new features without updating old software (was RE: protecting domains that don't exist), J D Falk, 10:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, ned+dkim, 07:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, ned+dkim, 07:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 06:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] ***SPAM-3*** Re: protecting domains that don't exist, Charles Lindsey, 04:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Charles Lindsey, 04:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Stephen Farrell, 03:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, ned+dkim, 02:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 00:14
April 15, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Bill.Oxley, 19:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Frank Ellermann, 19:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Douglas Otis, 16:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Frank Ellermann, 15:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Douglas Otis, 13:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 12:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Charles Lindsey, 04:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Charles Lindsey, 04:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Charles Lindsey, 04:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Wietse Venema, 04:01
April 14, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Frank Ellermann, 15:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 13:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 13:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Wietse Venema, 12:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Douglas Otis, 12:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Frank Ellermann, 12:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, robert, 11:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, John Levine, 11:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, J D Falk, 09:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Wietse Venema, 07:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Eliot Lear, 04:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, Charles Lindsey, 02:47
April 11, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, John Levine, 22:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Jim Fenton, 22:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 22:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 21:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, Arvel Hathcock, 21:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, Arvel Hathcock, 21:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Powers, Jot, 21:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Arvel Hathcock, 21:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Tony Hansen, 18:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Jim Fenton, 17:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 16:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Jim Fenton, 16:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Powers, Jot, 14:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Jim Fenton, 14:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Jim Fenton, 14:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Arvel Hathcock, 14:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, Jim Fenton, 14:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 14:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Dave Crocker, 14:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Jim Fenton, 13:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., MH Michael Hammer (5304), 13:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, John Levine, 13:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Dave Crocker, 13:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Eric Allman, 13:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA.., Dave Crocker, 13:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Dave Crocker, 13:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA.., SM, 13:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., J D Falk, 13:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Tony Hansen, 12:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Powers, Jot, 12:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, Arvel Hathcock, 12:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Dave Crocker, 12:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Powers, Jot, 11:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Murray S. Kucherawy, 11:11
- [ietf-dkim] A funny thing happened at RSA..., Murray S. Kucherawy, 10:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, John Levine, 10:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs.protecting a domain tree, MH Michael Hammer (5304), 10:02
- [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Re: New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Charles Lindsey, 09:55
April 10, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, Dave Crocker, 23:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] protecting domains that don't exist, John Levine, 22:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Douglas Otis, 13:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Eric Allman, 12:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Arvel Hathcock, 09:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] use cases for wildcard policy assertions, Roland Turner, 02:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Roland Turner, 01:44
April 09, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, robert, 15:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, MH Michael Hammer (5304), 12:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 11:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Eric Allman, 11:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] use cases for wildcard policy assertions, Siegel, Ellen, 09:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] use cases for wildcard policy assertions, Charles Lindsey, 03:47
April 08, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] use cases for wildcard policy assertions, Roland Turner, 22:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Arvel Hathcock, 18:16
- [ietf-dkim] use cases for wildcard policy assertions, J D Falk, 16:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, robert, 14:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Stephen Farrell, 14:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Stephen Farrell, 14:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Stephen Farrell, 13:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Stephen Farrell, 13:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 12:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 11:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 10:54
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1572] [Comment] protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, rt+dkim, 01:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Eliot Lear, 01:08
April 07, 2008
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree (#1534), Frank Ellermann, 19:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree (#1534), Jim Fenton, 17:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Jim Fenton, 17:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Wietse Venema, 16:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Douglas Otis, 16:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Jim Fenton, 15:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Jim Fenton, 14:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 14:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, robert, 14:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree (#1534), Frank Ellermann, 14:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Wietse Venema, 13:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Siegel, Ellen, 13:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 13:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Bill.Oxley, 12:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Douglas Otis, 12:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Jim Fenton, 12:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 11:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Eliot Lear, 11:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Dave Crocker, 10:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Eliot Lear, 08:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Barry Leiba, 08:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Stephen Farrell, 02:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting adomain tree, Frank Ellermann, 01:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] New Issue: protecting a domain name vs. protecting a domain tree, Eliot Lear, 00:51
April 04, 2008
- [ietf-dkim] New issue: Examples in SSP-03, Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:04
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1538] [Comment] review and repair of normative vocabulary usage, rt+dkim, 06:43
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1548] [Comment] Policies Required to close security threats, rt+dkim, 06:42
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1533] [Comment] strict vs. integrated, rt+dkim, 06:40
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1529] [Comment] Change "originator" to "author", rt+dkim, 06:38
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1537] [Comment] Reputation is out of scope or define it, rt+dkim, 06:38
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1542] [Comment] SSP Restrictive Policies Recommendation for an RFC 4871 update, rt+dkim, 06:35
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1530] [Comment] replace use of term "suspicious", rt+dkim, 06:34
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1546] [Comment] Discardable inappropriately specifies possible verifier action, rt+dkim, 06:34
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1527] [Comment] SSP threats analysis needed, rt+dkim, 06:29
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1526] [Comment] SSP applies only to receive-side filtering engine and not end-users, rt+dkim, 06:26
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1520] [Comment] limiting SSP to statements that inform recipient about (potential) signer actions, rt+dkim, 06:25
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1549] [Comment] Security Threats are [not] well defined, rt+dkim, 06:25
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1523] [Comment] Service Model summary, rt+dkim, 06:25
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1522] [Comment] Discussion of query traffic overhead, rt+dkim, 06:25
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1534] [Comment] Applying SSP to sub-domains does not work, rt+dkim, 06:24
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1524] [Comment] Signature semantics, rt+dkim, 06:24
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1525] [Comment] Restriction to posting by first Author breaks email semantics, rt+dkim, 06:24
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1532] [Comment] revise list labeling, rt+dkim, 06:23
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1528] [Comment] false negatives and false positives, rt+dkim, 06:23
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1536] [Comment] definition of action terms, rt+dkim, 06:23
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1531] [Comment] "does not exist", rt+dkim, 06:23
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1552] [Comment] Security Threat: Unexpected Third Party Senders, rt+dkim, 06:22
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1540] [Comment] deprecate t=testing, rt+dkim, 06:18
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1541] [Comment] Do we need SSP record for DKIM=unknown?, rt+dkim, 06:18
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1544] [Comment] SSP version numbers, rt+dkim, 06:15
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1545] [Comment] signed vs. unsigned header fields as input to SSP, rt+dkim, 06:14
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1550] [Comment] Rename SSP to ASP, rt+dkim, 06:14
- [ietf-dkim] [psg.com #1551] [Comment] NEW ISSUE: SSP-02: Policy Scope, rt+dkim, 06:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Practices protocol naming poll (Closing issue 1550), Stephen Farrell, 05:47