IETF DKIM (date)
June 30, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 20:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 20:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Scott Kitterman, 18:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 17:06
June 19, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 22:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Douglas Otis, 13:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Charles Lindsey, 07:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Charles Lindsey, 07:33
- [ietf-dkim] Assessors, hector, 03:40
June 17, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 21:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Douglas Otis, 21:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), hector, 19:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), hector, 16:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] General Feedback loop using DKIM, J.D. Falk, 14:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 14:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 13:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Douglas Otis, 13:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), hector, 13:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), SM, 13:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Suresh Ramasubramanian, 12:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Bill.Oxley, 11:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 11:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text forrfc4871-errata (resend), MH Michael Hammer \(5304\), 09:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Bill.Oxley, 09:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 07:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Bill.Oxley, 07:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Charles Lindsey, 06:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 03:31
June 16, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), hector, 23:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 20:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Scott Kitterman, 20:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), SM, 19:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Michael Thomas, 19:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Michael Thomas, 19:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Douglas Otis, 19:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 19:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Jon Callas, 19:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Steve Atkins, 18:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Shift Thurs or Fri?, Dave CROCKER, 18:25
- [ietf-dkim] Shift Thurs or Fri?, Dave CROCKER, 18:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), SM, 18:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Michael Thomas, 17:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), hector, 17:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] General Feedback loop using DKIM, Franck Martin, 17:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), MH Michael Hammer \(5304\), 17:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Murray S. Kucherawy, 16:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), hector, 15:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Douglas Otis, 15:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Jim Fenton, 15:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 14:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), SM, 14:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Jeff Macdonald, 13:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Bill.Oxley, 12:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Bill.Oxley, 12:01
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 11:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Bill.Oxley, 11:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Cullen Jennings, 11:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Charles Lindsey, 09:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Pasi.Eronen, 09:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 09:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Pasi(_dot_)Eronen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com, 08:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 08:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Michael Thomas, 00:38
June 15, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Deiva Shanmugam, deiva shanmugam, 23:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Dave CROCKER, 22:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, hector, 21:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Jim Fenton, 20:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] General Feedback loop using DKIM, Murray S. Kucherawy, 15:40
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Douglas Otis, 14:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), MH Michael Hammer \(5304\), 13:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Deiva Shanmugam, Al Iverson, 13:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Bill.Oxley, 11:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 07:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 07:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Charles Lindsey, 06:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Pasi(_dot_)Eronen(_at_)nokia(_dot_)com, 06:40
June 13, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata (resend), Jim Fenton, 19:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Jim Fenton, 18:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), John Levine, 17:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), SM, 16:58
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Steve Atkins, 15:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Bill.Oxley, 15:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Charles Lindsey, 15:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Michael Thomas, 13:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Michael Thomas, 12:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), SM, 11:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Eliot Lear, 09:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, J.D. Falk, 09:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), J.D. Falk, 08:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Dave CROCKER, 07:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, SM, 00:30
June 12, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Steve Atkins, 20:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Dave CROCKER, 20:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Jim Fenton, 19:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Dave CROCKER, 18:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Douglas Otis, 14:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Doug Otis, 14:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Bill.Oxley, 13:51
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Wietse Venema, 13:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 10:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Barry Leiba, 10:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Michael Thomas, 10:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Charles Lindsey, 08:33
- [ietf-dkim] Modified Introduction text for rfc4871-errata, Dave CROCKER, 02:54
June 11, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] General Feedback loop using DKIM, SM, 17:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Douglas Otis, 17:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Barry Leiba, 15:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Stephen Farrell, 12:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Suresh Ramasubramanian, 12:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Bill.Oxley, 11:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Michael Thomas, 10:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Dave CROCKER, 10:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] General Feedback loop using DKIM, Franck Martin, 09:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), J.D. Falk, 07:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Stephen Farrell, 06:39
- [ietf-dkim] Why bother removing features?, Dave CROCKER, 06:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Stephen Farrell, 06:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Dave CROCKER, 05:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Murray S. Kucherawy, 05:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Murray S. Kucherawy, 05:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Removing A-R headers, Dave CROCKER, 05:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Removing A-R headers, Murray S. Kucherawy, 05:03
June 10, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Scott Kitterman, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Removing A-R headers, Michael Thomas, 15:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Removing A-R headers, Doug Otis, 14:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), hector, 14:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, hector, 14:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), Michael Thomas, 13:36
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Barry Leiba, 13:09
- [ietf-dkim] list expanders (was Re: chained signatures, was l= summary), J.D. Falk, 12:02
- [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata-06.txt, Internet-Drafts, 07:02
- [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: New Version Notification - draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871-errata-06.txt], Dave CROCKER, 06:11
June 08, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Doug Otis, 21:02
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Murray S. Kucherawy, 18:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Doug Otis, 14:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Douglas Otis, 13:56
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Murray S. Kucherawy, 09:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Charles Lindsey, 07:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Murray S. Kucherawy, 06:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Murray S. Kucherawy, 06:17
June 04, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Douglas Otis, 20:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Douglas Otis, 20:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Murray S. Kucherawy, 19:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Mark Delany, 19:28
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Jon Callas, 18:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Douglas Otis, 18:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Jon Callas, 18:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, J.D. Falk, 17:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Douglas Otis, 17:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] incompetent list managers, was chained signatures, was l= summary, John Levine, 16:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Douglas Otis, 15:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Jon Callas, 14:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Wietse Venema, 13:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Siegel, Ellen, 12:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Murray S. Kucherawy, 12:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Michael Thomas, 09:45
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Charles Lindsey, 09:03
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Charles Lindsey, 08:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Dave CROCKER, 02:16
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Eliot Lear, 01:58
June 03, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-deployment-05.txt, Dave CROCKER, 18:38
- [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-deployment-05.txt, Internet-Drafts, 18:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Douglas Otis, 15:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Murray S. Kucherawy, 12:17
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, John Levine, 10:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Charles Lindsey, 06:35
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A meta-note: stepping back from the feature discussion, SM, 02:34
June 02, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, hector, 23:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] A meta-note: stepping back from the feature discussion, hector, 22:47
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Douglas Otis, 20:34
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, John Levine, 19:30
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Jon Callas, 19:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Douglas Otis, 19:20
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, J.D. Falk, 19:16
- [ietf-dkim] A meta-note: stepping back from the feature discussion, Jon Callas, 19:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Michael Thomas, 19:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Murray S. Kucherawy, 19:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Jon Callas, 18:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Murray S. Kucherawy, 18:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Doug Otis, 18:48
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Murray S. Kucherawy, 18:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Murray S. Kucherawy, 18:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Douglas Otis, 18:32
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, John Levine, 18:26
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Murray S. Kucherawy, 18:22
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Jon Callas, 18:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, John R. Levine, 18:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Jon Callas, 18:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Michael Thomas, 18:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Jon Callas, 17:55
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Michael Thomas, 17:50
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Jon Callas, 17:42
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Doug Otis, 17:33
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Paul Russell, 17:18
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, John Levine, 17:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, Murray S. Kucherawy, 17:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- l= and x=, John Levine, 17:00
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 4871bis/4871 interop, John Levine, 16:54
- Re: [ietf-dkim] misusing DKIM, was chained signatures, was l= summary, John Levine, 16:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x=, Paul Russell, 16:12
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x=, John R. Levine, 15:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 4871bis/4871 interop, Murray S. Kucherawy, 15:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x=, Murray S. Kucherawy, 15:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x=, John R. Levine, 15:08
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- SHA1 support, Murray S. Kucherawy, 15:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Douglas Otis, 14:57
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Michael Thomas, 14:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Eliot Lear, 14:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Michael Thomas, 14:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Dave Crocker, 14:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Murray Kucherawy, 14:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Murray Kucherawy, 14:15
- Re: [ietf-dkim] 4871bis/4871 interop, Douglas Otis, 13:31
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Douglas Otis, 13:25
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Douglas Otis, 13:20
- [ietf-dkim] 4871bis/4871 interop, Stephen Farrell, 11:18
- [ietf-dkim] Fwd: Last Call: draft-ietf-opsawg-operations-and-management (Guidelines for Considering Operations and Management of New Protocols and Protocol Extensions) to BCP, Barry Leiba, 11:11
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Michael Thomas, 09:27
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Paul Russell, 09:23
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Wietse Venema, 08:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Dave CROCKER, 07:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Charles Lindsey, 07:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, John Levine, 07:09
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Eliot Lear, 04:01
June 01, 2009
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- SHA1 support, Suresh Ramasubramanian, 23:37
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Jon Callas, 19:04
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- SHA1 support, Jon Callas, 18:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- h: Acceptable hash algorithms, Jon Callas, 18:52
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Jon Callas, 18:43
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Wietse Venema, 17:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Dave CROCKER, 15:49
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Eliot Lear, 15:29
- Re: [ietf-dkim] Features that could be reconsidered as part of the bis process, Doug Otis, 14:38
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Michael Thomas, 13:21
- Re: [ietf-dkim] who's using l=, Michael Thomas, 13:14
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Dave CROCKER, 13:10
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Paul Russell, 12:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Steve Atkins, 12:46
- Re: [ietf-dkim] who's using l=, Steve Atkins, 12:41
- Re: [ietf-dkim] who's using l=, Jeff Macdonald, 12:24
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- k: Key type, Siegel, Ellen, 12:19
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Siegel, Ellen, 12:13
- Re: [ietf-dkim] who's using l=, Dave CROCKER, 12:07
- Re: [ietf-dkim] who's using l=, Steve Atkins, 12:05
- Re: [ietf-dkim] who's using l=, Barry Leiba, 11:27
- [ietf-dkim] Document Action: 'DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM) Service Overview' to Informational RFC, The IESG, 10:59
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Barry Leiba, 10:53
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Steve Atkins, 09:44
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, MH Michael Hammer \(5304\), 09:39
- Re: [ietf-dkim] RFC4871bis - whether to drop -- x: Signature expiration, Charles Lindsey, 07:06
- Re: [ietf-dkim] chained signatures, was l= summary, Charles Lindsey, 07:01