IETF MARID (date)
June 30, 2004
- Re: CSV and STARTTLS, Claus Assmann, 20:03
- Re: CSV and STARTTLS, John Levine, 19:03
- Who are we accrediting?, John Levine, 18:59
- Re: CSV and STARTTLS, Andrew Newton, 18:56
- Re: The problem with Unified SPF, wayne, 17:42
- Re: CSV and STARTTLS, Hector Santos, 17:24
- Re: The problem with Unified SPF, Douglas Otis, 17:12
- Comparing apples to multiple, hypothetical oranges, Dave Crocker, 16:58
- CSV and STARTTLS, Roy Badami, 15:52
- Re: CSV and STARTTLS, John Levine, 15:26
- Re: The problem with Unified SPF, Meng Weng Wong, 15:25
- Re: The problem with Unified SPF, Roy Badami, 15:18
- Re: The problem with Unified SPF, Meng Weng Wong, 15:03
- Re: CSV and STARTTLS, Douglas Otis, 14:59
- CSV and STARTTLS, Andrew Newton, 14:25
- The problem with Unified SPF, Roy Badami, 14:19
- Use of PTR records in CSV/DNA, Roy Badami, 13:25
- Re: Differences between CSV and Sender-ID, Hector Santos, 13:25
- The problem with Unified SPF, Roy Badami, 13:21
- Re: Differences between CSV and Sender-ID, Douglas Otis, 12:48
- CEAS Conference on July 30-31, John R Levine, 11:05
- Re: Differences between CSV and Sender-ID, Greg Connor, 10:15
- Re: Differences between CSV and Sender-ID, Douglas Otis, 10:09
- Re: Differences between CSV and Sender-ID, wayne, 09:44
- RE: Sender ID and CSV are complimentary (long - sorry) (was: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV), Sauer, Damon, 09:17
- RE: Differences between CSV and Sender-ID, Olson, Margaret, 08:31
- RE: DDoS attacks via SPF, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 07:57
- Differences between CSV and Sender-ID, Andrew Newton, 07:28
- Re: Sender ID and CSV are complimentary (long - sorry) (was: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV), Tony Finch, 03:05
- Re: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV, Tony Finch, 02:42
June 29, 2004
- Re: DDOS attacks, Meng Weng Wong, 23:53
- the hypothetical "spammers will forge TCP SMTP streams", Meng Weng Wong, 23:48
- adding overall timeouts, Meng Weng Wong, 23:43
- Re: How fragile is SPF ?, wayne, 23:13
- DDoS attacks via SPF, wayne, 23:09
- Re: How fragile is SPF ?, Hector Santos, 22:08
- Re: How fragile is SPF ?, wayne, 21:32
- RE: How fragile is SPF ?, Gordon Fecyk, 20:03
- How fragile is SPF ?, John Levine, 19:35
- Re: Sender ID and CSV are complimentary (long - sorry) (was: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV), Andrew Newton, 18:47
- RE: DDOS attacks, Roy Badami, 17:56
- RE: DDOS attacks, Gordon Fecyk, 17:33
- Sender ID and CSV are complimentary (long - sorry) (was: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV), Roy Badami, 17:03
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Matthew Elvey, 16:38
- Re: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV, Matthew Elvey, 16:09
- DDOS attacks, Meng Weng Wong, 15:52
- Re: SPF vs CSV scenarios, Matthew Elvey, 15:29
- Reminder: three posts daily limit, Greg Connor, 15:15
- Re: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV, Douglas Otis, 14:30
- Re: SPF vs CSV scenarios, John Leslie, 14:06
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Roy Badami, 13:30
- Re: Problem scenarios for SPF vs CSV, Roy Badami, 13:21
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 12:51
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Valdis . Kletnieks, 12:33
- Re: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV, Greg Connor, 11:39
- draft-ietf-marid-core-01, Tony Finch, 11:35
- Re: Action items from June 28 jabber, Roy Badami, 10:27
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Douglas Otis, 10:08
- Re: Unified SPF overlaps with CSV, Douglas Otis, 09:52
- RE: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Harry Katz, 09:17
- Re: Action items from June 28 jabber, Tony Finch, 08:56
- Unified SPF overlaps with CSV, Meng Weng Wong, 08:11
- SPF vs CSV scenarios, Meng Weng Wong, 07:49
- Action items from June 28 jabber, John Leslie, 07:27
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 03:53
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 03:42
- Re: Problem scenarios for SPF vs CSV, Hector Santos, 03:39
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 02:50
June 28, 2004
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Matthew Elvey, 23:17
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Greg Connor, 22:06
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Matthew Elvey, 21:37
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Douglas Otis, 21:22
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Matthew Elvey, 21:20
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Matthew Elvey, 20:57
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 19:53
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Matthew Elvey, 18:24
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 17:56
- RE: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Harry Katz, 17:48
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Matthew Elvey, 17:30
- RE: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Harry Katz, 16:40
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Matthew Elvey, 16:32
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Douglas Otis, 15:53
- Problem scenarios for SPF vs CSV, Meng Weng Wong, 14:19
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Matthew Elvey, 13:50
- RE: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 13:36
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:34
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-core-01.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:33
- Re: Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Douglas Otis, 11:38
- RE: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Harry Katz, 11:09
- Will SPF/Unified SPF/SenderID bring down the 'net?, Matthew Elvey, 09:55
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Greg Connor, 09:36
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Matthew Elvey, 08:44
June 26, 2004
- Re: Why XML, Matthew Elvey, 19:16
- Re: Unified SPF: RPC factored lookups = DVP, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 14:42
- Re: CVS specifics: Accreditation, Hector Santos, 14:31
- Re: CVS specifics: Accreditation, John Leslie, 07:15
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Eric A. Hall, 03:28
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Hector Santos, 03:20
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Roy Badami, 03:18
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Roy Badami, 02:42
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Eric A. Hall, 02:18
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Greg Connor, 01:57
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Eric A. Hall, 01:21
June 25, 2004
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Hector Santos, 23:21
- Re: Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Greg Connor, 22:27
- Re: consensus statement on record syntax and type, Hector Santos, 20:36
- CVS specifics: Accreditation, Hector Santos, 19:56
- Re: consensus statement on record syntax and type, Andrew Newton, 18:35
- Re: Request for clarification (was: consensus statement on record syntax and type), Andrew Newton, 18:31
- Re: consensus statement on record syntax and type, Dave Crocker, 17:22
- Backward compatibility with deployed SPF records (and choice of domain), Roy Badami, 17:16
- Request for clarification (was: consensus statement on record syntax and type), Roy Badami, 16:29
- Re: CSV details, Dave Crocker, 16:14
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Roy Badami, 15:58
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Sean Comeau, 15:22
- Re: consensus statement on record syntax and type, Andrew Newton, 14:09
- Re: CSV details, John Leslie, 14:08
- Re: consensus statement on record syntax and type, Marshall Rose, 13:58
- Re: consensus statement on record syntax and type, John Leslie, 13:42
- Re: CSV details, Meng Weng Wong, 13:29
- RE: PRA and the dependancy on Resent-* headers., Harry Katz, 11:46
- consensus statement on record syntax and type, Andrew Newton, 11:41
- PRA and the dependancy on Resent-* headers., wayne, 11:00
- RE: Sender identification is not the answer, Gordon Fecyk, 09:45
- Re: Violiates US ECPA: Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Hadmut Danisch, 08:15
- Re: CSV details, John Leslie, 07:45
- Re: Unified SPF: RPC factored lookups = DVP, Eric A. Hall, 07:41
- CSV details, Meng Weng Wong, 07:06
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-rationale-00.txt, Internet-Drafts, 07:03
- Re: Unified SPF: RPC factored lookups = DVP, Meng Weng Wong, 06:41
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 06:37
- DNS/MTA mix, Sauer, Damon, 06:26
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Dave Crocker, 06:20
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMA ark scopes, Rand Wacker, 06:11
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 05:03
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Dave Crocker, 04:28
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Dave Crocker, 04:25
June 24, 2004
- Violiates US ECPA: Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Hector Santos, 23:37
- RE: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Harry Katz, 23:28
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Hector Santos, 23:02
- Re: rejection after DATA, Hector Santos, 22:37
- Re: Unified SPF, wayne, 22:12
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMA ark scopes, Theo Schlossnagle, 22:06
- RE: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMA ark scopes, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 21:55
- RE: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMA ark scopes, John R Levine, 21:43
- RE: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMA ark scopes, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 21:30
- Re: moving the anonymous mail argument to ASRG, Greg Connor, 21:14
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, David Wall, 21:09
- rejection after DATA, Meng Weng Wong, 21:06
- Re: moving the anonymous mail argument to ASRG, David Wall, 20:56
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, John Levine, 20:52
- Re: moving the anonymous mail argument to ASRG, John Levine, 20:35
- RE: Sender identification is not the answer, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 20:20
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Hector Santos, 18:32
- RE: Sender identification is not the answer, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 17:23
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Greg Connor, 17:22
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Douglas Otis, 17:13
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, David Wall, 17:07
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Mark C. Langston, 16:55
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Meng Weng Wong, 16:54
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, David Wall, 16:43
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, David Wall, 16:32
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAarkscopes, Tony Finch, 16:31
- Re: Sender identification is not the answer, Douglas Otis, 16:25
- Sender identification is not the answer, Roy Badami, 15:28
- Sender identification is not the answer, David Wall, 14:52
- Re: Unified SPF: CSV explained, Meng Weng Wong, 13:49
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAarkscopes, Roy Badami, 13:38
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAarkscopes, Meng Weng Wong, 12:56
- Re: Designing and Allocating a new RR type, Hadmut Danisch, 12:50
- RE: ASN.1 as encoding (was: Designing and Allocating a new RR typ e), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11:27
- Re: Designing and Allocating a new RR type, Eric A. Hall, 11:18
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Roy Badami, 11:16
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Meng Weng Wong, 10:59
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Meng Weng Wong, 10:46
- Re: Designing and Allocating a new RR type, Hadmut Danisch, 10:45
- Re: Designing and Allocating a new RR type, Douglas Otis, 10:25
- Re: Designing and Allocating a new RR type, wayne, 10:12
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Hadmut Danisch, 09:58
- Re: ASN.1 as encoding (was: Designing and Allocating a new RR type), Claus Assmann, 09:52
- Designing and Allocating a new RR type, Hadmut Danisch, 09:30
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Douglas Otis, 09:02
- Re: TXT now, new RR later (was Re: Why not XML), Hadmut Danisch, 09:02
- Re: TXT now, new RR later (was Re: Why not XML), Hadmut Danisch, 08:55
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAarkscopes, Roy Badami, 08:54
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Douglas Otis, 08:53
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Douglas Otis, 08:44
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Roy Badami, 08:41
- SPF Domain Lookup Analysis [was Re: Some stats on TXT usage in domain names (updated)], Hector Santos, 08:22
- Re: Unified SPF: block versus factored records for HELO and MTAMAark scopes, Meng Weng Wong, 07:50
- Re: Unified SPF: scope macro to distinguish identities, Meng Weng Wong, 07:26
- Deployment RE: TXT now, new RR later (was Re: Why not XML), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 07:07
- Re: Unified SPF, william\(at\)elan.net, 07:06
- Re: Unified SPF, william(at)elan.net, 06:57
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Roy Badami, 06:55
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Roy Badami, 06:45
- Re: Unified SPF, John Leslie, 06:24
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Tony Finch, 06:13
- Re: Unified SPF, John Leslie, 06:08
- Re: CSV, NBB, Dave Crocker, 05:29
- what, precise, is SPF and what is not SPF?, Dave Crocker, 05:29
- TXT now, new RR later (was Re: Why not XML), Michael R. Brumm, 03:47
- Re: Some stats on TXT usage in domain names (updated), wayne, 00:39
June 23, 2004
- Re: Unified SPF, Douglas Otis, 22:28
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Douglas Otis, 22:02
- Unified SPF, Meng Weng Wong, 20:49
- RE: Why not XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 20:32
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, william(at)elan.net, 19:16
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Douglas Otis, 18:36
- Re: out of line XML, was Why not XML, John R Levine, 18:09
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Robert Barclay, 17:50
- RE: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Sauer, Damon, 17:35
- Re: Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Aredridel, 17:34
- Re: using reputation lookups first, Roy Badami, 16:58
- Could binary encoding really be the answer?, Greg Connor, 16:47
- Re: extensibility as an attack vector, Douglas Otis, 16:44
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Marshall Rose, 16:43
- Re: draft-ietf-marid-core-01.txt, Marshall Rose, 16:43
- draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Roy Badami, 16:29
- Re: using reputation lookups first, Douglas Otis, 15:57
- draft-ietf-marid-submitter-01.txt, Harry Katz, 15:17
- Re: XML/SPF colaberation, Jon Kyme, 15:08
- RE: asymmetric routing, was Factored lookup - ML patent claim issue., Gordon Fecyk, 14:46
- Re: Why not XML, Jon Kyme, 14:46
- Re: extensibility as an attack vector, Hadmut Danisch, 14:35
- using reputation lookups first, Meng Weng Wong, 14:05
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Luis Bruno, 13:39
- Re: out of line XML, was Why not XML, william(at)elan.net, 13:15
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Greg Connor, 12:56
- Re: out of line XML, was Why not XML, John Levine, 12:12
- Suggestion for a route to compromise, rbarclay, 12:06
- [no subject], rbarclay, 11:35
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Hadmut Danisch, 11:25
- Re: XML/SPF colaberation, Hadmut Danisch, 11:10
- extensibility as an attack vector, Eric A. Hall, 10:46
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Greg Connor, 10:41
- Re: Why not XML, Hadmut Danisch, 10:35
- Re: XML/SPF colaberation, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 10:20
- Re: Why XML, Douglas Otis, 10:18
- Re: Why not XML, Alan DeKok, 10:15
- Re: Why not XML, Alan DeKok, 10:09
- Re: Why not XML, Hadmut Danisch, 09:35
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Hadmut Danisch, 09:30
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus, wayne, 09:28
- STOP NOW! (was Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML)), Andrew Newton, 09:16
- Re: Why not XML, Hadmut Danisch, 09:05
- Re: XML/SPF colaberation, Luis Bruno, 08:58
- Re: Why not XML, Eric A. Hall, 08:44
- Re: XML/SPF colaberation, Hector Santos, 08:33
- Re: Why not XML, Hector Santos, 08:20
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Mark Lentczner, 08:20
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Luis Bruno, 08:18
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Luis Bruno, 08:15
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Mark Lentczner, 08:11
- RE: Why not XML, John R Levine, 08:03
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), hadmut, 07:33
- Re: XML/SPF colaberation, hadmut, 07:28
- Re: Why not XML, Alan DeKok, 07:27
- RE: Why not XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 07:14
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus, Hector Santos, 07:08
- Re: Why not XML, Eric A. Hall, 06:58
- XML/SPF colaberation, Sauer, Damon, 06:54
- RE: Why not XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 06:37
- Re: Why not XML, John Levine, 06:33
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Luis Bruno, 06:31
- RE: Why not XML, Michael R. Brumm, 03:56
- Re: Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Sean Comeau, 03:41
- Re: Why not XML, Jon Kyme, 02:49
- Re: Why XML, Matthew Elvey, 01:58
June 22, 2004
- Emotions, Encoding, and Ignorance (Was: Why not XML), Hadmut Danisch, 23:57
- Re: Why XML, Hadmut Danisch, 22:40
- Re: Why not XML, Greg Connor, 21:54
- Re: Why XML, Douglas Otis, 18:37
- Re: Why XML, Sean Comeau, 16:20
- Re: Why XML, scott, 15:53
- Re: Why XML, Chris Zumbrunn, 13:22
- RE: Why not XML, terry, 13:04
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-csv-dna-00.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:58
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-csv-intro-00.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:58
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-csv-csa-00.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:58
- RE: Why XML, terry, 12:52
- Re: Why XML, Alan DeKok, 12:33
- Re: Why not XML, Hadmut Danisch, 12:30
- RE: Why XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 12:21
- Re: Why XML, Hadmut Danisch, 11:45
- Re: Why XML, Hadmut Danisch, 11:40
- Why not XML, wayne, 11:35
- Re: Why XML, Hadmut Danisch, 11:20
- RE: Why XML, Roy Badami, 11:17
- RE: Why XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:55
- Re: Why XML, Chris Zumbrunn, 10:49
- RE: Why XML, terry, 10:49
- RE: Why XML, terry, 10:27
- RE: Why XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:20
- Re: Why XML, Hadmut Danisch, 10:20
- Why XML, Roy Badami, 10:13
- Re: On Language, Margaret Olson, 10:07
- Why XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08:38
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus, Greg Connor, 08:33
- RE: FW: Drive Towards Consensus, Jim Lyon, 08:31
- On Language, Meng Weng Wong, 08:10
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08:03
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 07:59
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 07:56
- Re: FW: Drive Towards Consensus, Meng Weng Wong, 07:50
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Hector Santos, 05:09
- Re: FW: Drive Towards Consensus, Hector Santos, 04:29
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Michael R. Brumm, 03:35
June 21, 2004
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus, wayne, 23:01
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Greg Connor, 22:38
- Re: asymmetric routing, was Factored lookup - ML patent claim issue., John Levine, 22:19
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Douglas Otis, 20:51
- Re: FW: Drive Towards Consensus, wayne, 20:33
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus, wayne, 20:32
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus, wayne, 20:31
- RE: Factored lookup - ML patent claim issue., Gordon Fecyk, 19:56
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Ted Hardie, 18:20
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Roy Badami, 17:04
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Margaret Olson, 16:50
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Margaret Olson, 16:37
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Roy Badami, 16:34
- RE: MARID Records and the standards process, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 16:10
- RE: Factored lookup - ML patent claim issue., Bill Mcinnis, 16:09
- RE: Factored lookup - ML patent claim issue., Bill Mcinnis, 16:07
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 15:47
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Hector Santos, 14:11
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Andrew Newton, 13:55
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Mark Lentczner, 13:32
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Luis Bruno, 13:29
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Jonathan Gardner, 11:41
- Re: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Hector Santos, 08:16
- Re: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Dave Crocker, 06:21
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Tony Finch, 02:18
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Matthew Elvey, 01:40
June 20, 2004
- RE: MARID Records and the standards process, John R Levine, 23:25
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Dave Crocker, 23:12
- Wouldn't Mixing DMP with Resent-From: and Submitter..., Gordon Fecyk, 20:07
- RE: rough consensus and working code, Jim Lyon, 18:48
- Granularity of Reputation (was Re: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Matthew Elvey, 18:42
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Matthew Elvey, 18:26
- Re: CSV (NBB, SPF incorporation of HELO check), Roy Badami, 18:18
- Re: CSV (NBB, SPF incorporation of HELO check), Matthew Elvey, 17:43
- Re: CSV, NBB, Roy Badami, 16:11
- Re: CSV, NBB, Matthew Elvey, 15:54
- Re: CSV, NBB, Roy Badami, 14:47
- Re: CSV, NBB, Roy Badami, 14:35
- Re: CSV, NBB, Roy Badami, 14:13
- Re: MARID Records and the standards process, Hector Santos, 02:47
- Re: MARID Records and the standards process, william(at)elan.net, 01:12
- RE: MARID Records and the standards process, Jim Lyon, 00:07
June 19, 2004
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Marshall Rose, 16:49
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Marshall Rose, 16:40
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Matthew Elvey, 14:52
- Re: MARID Records and the standards process, Eric A. Hall, 14:48
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Sean Comeau, 14:29
- Factored lookup - ML patent claim issue., Matthew Elvey, 13:48
- RE: MARID Records and the standards process, John R Levine, 13:18
- Re: CSV, NBB, Matthew Elvey, 11:56
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Philip Miller, 07:57
- Re: CSV, NBB, Alan DeKok, 07:52
- Re: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Philip Miller, 07:14
- Re: CSV specification revision available, John Leslie, 05:53
- Re: CSV, NBB, Roy Badami, 05:25
June 18, 2004
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Re cords], Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 20:55
- Re: CSV, NBB, Matthew Elvey, 20:49
- Re: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Matthew Elvey, 20:38
- RE: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Aredridel, 20:03
- RE: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Roy Badami, 19:22
- Re: FW: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Douglas Otis, 17:38
- FW: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Jim Lyon, 15:46
- RE: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Jim Lyon, 15:42
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Matthew Elvey, 14:58
- RE: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Douglas Otis, 14:03
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Bill Mcinnis, 13:45
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Bill Mcinnis, 13:43
- [no subject], Bill Mcinnis, 13:41
- Re: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, wayne, 10:51
- RE: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Jim Lyon, 10:31
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:13
- RE: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:08
- RE: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Jim Lyon, 09:49
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 08:57
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 08:22
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 05:12
- Re: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Hector Santos, 01:16
June 17, 2004
- RE: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Douglas Otis, 23:53
- RE: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, John R Levine, 23:43
- Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Carl Hutzler, 18:06
- RE: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Jim Lyon, 17:54
- RE: Against Extensibility in MARID Records, Jim Lyon, 17:36
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Dave Crocker, 15:05
- Mailing List Discourse, Andrew Newton, 11:05
- Against Extensibility in MARID Records, John T Levine, 10:32
- Wildcards, Hector Santos, 09:41
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Douglas Otis, 09:32
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Eric A. Hall, 09:32
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 08:33
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 08:25
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 07:57
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 07:50
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 07:45
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Bill Mcinnis, 07:17
- Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records, wayne, 06:07
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Tony Finch, 05:58
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Dave Crocker, 05:13
- The vast world of XML (Was: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 04:11
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 02:00
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 01:54
June 16, 2004
- RE: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Jim Lyon, 23:20
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Greg Connor, 22:49
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Margaret Olson, 20:06
- Re: Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Marshall Rose, 17:30
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Eric A. Hall, 17:16
- RE: rough consensus and working code, Douglas Otis, 16:42
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Sean Comeau, 16:23
- Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Greg Connor, 16:15
- Drive Towards Consensus [was Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records], Marshall Rose, 15:59
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 15:04
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Aredridel, 15:03
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jim Lyon, 15:00
- RE: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Jim Lyon, 14:46
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Eric A. Hall, 14:33
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Alan DeKok, 13:46
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jim Lyon, 13:25
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 13:24
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 13:15
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 13:07
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 13:07
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Peter Koch, 13:07
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Douglas Otis, 12:55
- Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Andrew Newton, 12:02
- RE: XML exploits, Michael R. Brumm, 11:59
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Eric A. Hall, 11:55
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Eric A. Hall, 11:49
- RE: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Michael R. Brumm, 11:34
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Margaret Olson, 11:34
- Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Douglas Otis, 11:32
- Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Andrew Newton, 11:25
- Re: Its the XML infoset that is key RE: Working toward unity on XML, wayne, 11:13
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Andrew Newton, 11:05
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 11:01
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Jonathan Gardner, 10:58
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Douglas Otis, 10:42
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Douglas Otis, 10:39
- Re: On Extensibility in MARID Records, Jonathan Gardner, 10:34
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Greg Connor, 10:19
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Chris Zumbrunn, 10:09
- Re: CSV specification revision available, John Leslie, 09:47
- Its the XML infoset that is key RE: Working toward unity on XML, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:47
- On Extensibility in MARID Records, Jim Lyon, 09:37
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 08:55
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Hector Santos, 08:26
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 08:25
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Edward Lewis, 08:23
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Eric A. Hall, 08:15
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Andrew Newton, 08:00
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Sam Silberman, 06:35
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Margaret Olson, 05:56
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Margaret Olson, 05:48
- Re: XML exploits, wayne, 05:30
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, wayne, 04:53
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 03:35
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Tony Finch, 03:12
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Jon Kyme, 01:22
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Douglas Otis, 00:32
June 15, 2004
- RE: Working toward unity on XML, Jim Lyon, 23:39
- Re: OT: do-not-spam list, Douglas Otis, 23:34
- Re: Working toward unity on XML, Eric A. Hall, 23:14
- Working toward unity on XML, Greg Connor, 22:14
- OT: do-not-spam list, Michel Py, 22:08
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Dave Crocker, 17:26
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Dave Crocker, 17:22
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Eric A. Hall, 16:12
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Meng Weng Wong, 15:32
- Re: XML exploits, Marshall Rose, 14:40
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Eric A. Hall, 14:34
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Matthew Elvey, 12:33
- Re: rough consensus and working code, John Levine, 11:58
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Ted Hardie, 11:40
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Rand Wacker, 11:29
- XML exploits, wayne, 11:26
- Re: rough consensus and working code, william(at)elan.net, 11:14
- Re: rough consensus and working code, wayne, 11:02
- Re: rough consensus and working code, John Levine, 10:48
- FTC says no do-not-email until there's authentication, John Levine, 10:41
- Re: rough consensus and working code, Andrew Newton, 10:26
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Markus Stumpf, 10:23
- RE: SPF and SenderID /MARID comparisons, Olson, Margaret, 09:43
- rough consensus and working code, wayne, 09:35
- Re: SPF and SenderID /MARID comparisons, wayne, 08:59
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Tony Finch, 08:53
- Re: CSV specification revision available, John Leslie, 08:39
- Re: comments on SPF, Edward Lewis, 08:08
- Humming at the Interim (Was: MTAmark), wayne, 07:27
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Tony Finch, 06:15
- Re: CSV specification revision available, John Leslie, 04:58
- SPF and SenderID /MARID comparisons, Olson, Margaret, 03:23
- Re: Reality check please (You set me up! Thanks!), Matthew Elvey, 03:07
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hector Santos, 02:00
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Matthew Elvey, 00:52
- Re: Reality check please, Matthew Elvey, 00:38
- Re: CSV specification revision available, Matthew Elvey, 00:02
June 14, 2004
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Matthew Elvey, 23:08
- Re: Reality check please, Douglas Otis, 23:04
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Matthew Elvey, 22:52
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Matthew Elvey, 22:52
- Re: Reality check please, Matthew Elvey, 21:45
- Re: comments on SPF, Aredridel, 21:40
- Re: comments on SPF, Greg Connor, 20:38
- Re: CSV specification revision available, John Leslie, 20:10
- CSV specification revision available, Dave Crocker, 19:07
- Re: Why should I link a library thats larger than my ENTIRE MTA?, James Couzens, 18:21
- RE: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 18:05
- RE: Why should I link a library thats larger than my ENTIRE MTA?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 18:02
- Re: Why should I link a library thats larger than my ENTIRE MTA?, Douglas Otis, 17:40
- Re: Why should I link a library thats larger than my ENTIRE MTA?, Aredridel, 16:50
- Re: comments on SPF, Aredridel, 16:39
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Markus Stumpf, 16:23
- Re: comments on SPF, wayne, 15:54
- Why should I link a library thats larger than my ENTIRE MTA?, James Couzens, 15:52
- [Levity] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Sauer, Damon, 14:58
- RE: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 14:34
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-mari d-core-01 xml use, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 14:31
- Re: comments on SPF, Edward Lewis, 13:51
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, MW Mike Weiner \(5028\), 13:10
- Re: comments on SPF, wayne, 12:56
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, wayne, 12:34
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Markus Stumpf, 12:10
- RE: Ancient history (draft-ietf-marid-core-00), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:47
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Luis Bruno, 10:18
- comments on SPF, Edward Lewis, 09:48
- Re: Ancient history (draft-ietf-marid-core-00), Jon Kyme, 08:59
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Edward Lewis, 08:11
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Edward Lewis, 08:11
- Re: Ancient history (draft-ietf-marid-core-00), Alan DeKok, 07:47
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 07:33
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Edward Lewis, 07:13
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Edward Lewis, 07:13
- RE: topic for monday's chat, Gordon Fecyk, 06:47
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Gordon Fecyk, 06:25
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, wayne, 06:22
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Jon Kyme, 02:01
- Re: header rewriting, was MARID charter and using 2822 data, Jon Kyme, 01:22
June 13, 2004
- RE: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 19:00
- topic for monday's chat, Marshall Rose, 16:00
- RE: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 14:14
- Re: header rewriting, was MARID charter and using 2822 data, John Levine, 13:21
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hector Santos, 10:59
- RE: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments ondraft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Rich Rosenbaum, 09:56
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Greg Connor, 09:35
- RE: MARID charter and using 2822 data, Mark Joseph, 09:20
- Ancient history (draft-ietf-marid-core-00), Greg Connor, 08:01
- exists element (draft-ietf-marid-core-00), Greg Connor, 07:35
- RE: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 05:28
June 12, 2004
- RE: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments ondraft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 19:50
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Michel Py, 16:32
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Michel Py, 16:32
- [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments ondraft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Rich Rosenbaum, 16:18
- A layered approach to identities, possibilities for a chain of trust, Greg Connor, 12:52
- Re: MARID charter and using 2822 data, Markus Stumpf, 11:41
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hector Santos, 10:57
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Luis Bruno, 07:20
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Jon Kyme, 01:49
June 11, 2004
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hector Santos, 23:59
- Re: MARID charter and using 2822 data, Marshall Rose, 20:17
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR, Bob Atkinson, 17:59
- Re: suggested path and arch, John Levine, 17:39
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, william(at)elan.net, 16:55
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR, wayne, 16:48
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), william(at)elan.net, 16:29
- Re: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments ondraft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 16:27
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Markus Stumpf, 16:04
- Re: suggested path and arch, Luis Bruno, 15:05
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Markus Stumpf, 14:57
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Andrew Newton, 14:52
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 14:24
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Edward Lewis, 13:54
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Edward Lewis, 13:53
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 13:52
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Edward Lewis, 13:39
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 13:37
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 13:32
- RE: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments ondraft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 13:29
- Re: [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments ondraft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Markus Stumpf, 13:11
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Markus Stumpf, 12:55
- [RFC 1464?] RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments ondraft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Gordon Fecyk, 12:39
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Markus Stumpf, 12:20
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 12:18
- RE: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 12:09
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 11:58
- RE: suggested path and arch, Edward Lewis, 11:32
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Edward Lewis, 11:08
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), wayne, 11:04
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Markus Stumpf, 10:28
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Markus Stumpf, 10:12
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Claus Assmann, 09:52
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:36
- Contradiction in draft-ietf-marid-core-00.txt, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 06:52
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), william(at)elan.net, 05:43
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hector Santos, 04:39
- Re: Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, william(at)elan.net, 00:04
June 10, 2004
- Alternative to TXT or new RR was: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 23:15
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Claus Assmann, 21:39
- RE: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 21:21
- RE: suggested path and arch, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 21:07
- RE: suggested path and arch, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 21:01
- MARID charter and using 2822 data, wayne, 20:09
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Gordon Fecyk, 19:37
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 15:29
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Hector Santos, 15:18
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 14:24
- Re: non-TXT RR: reuse MB/MD/MF/MG/MR?, wayne, 14:19
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, wayne, 14:14
- Re: Reality check please, Hector Santos, 14:05
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, william(at)elan.net, 13:18
- Re: non-TXT RR: reuse MB/MD/MF/MG/MR?, william(at)elan.net, 13:08
- Re: suggested path and arch, Alan DeKok, 12:50
- RE: suggested path and arch, Edward Lewis, 12:16
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, ned . freed, 11:43
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 10:30
- Re: suggested path and arch, Eric A. Hall, 10:19
- RE: suggested path and arch, Bob Atkinson, 10:16
- suggested path and arch, Eric A. Hall, 09:58
- other RR's, Edward Lewis, 08:56
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, wayne, 08:41
- Re: Reality check please, wayne, 08:32
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Eric A. Hall, 08:22
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Eric A. Hall, 08:14
- Re: MTAmark (was: Reality check please), Claus Assmann, 08:06
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Alan DeKok, 08:02
- non-TXT RR: reuse MB/MD/MF/MG/MR?, wayne, 07:55
- RE: Reality check please, G. Waleed Kavalec, 07:20
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Jim Lyon, 00:40
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 00:36
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Michel Py, 00:22
June 09, 2004
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Greg Connor, 22:12
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 22:09
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Greg Connor, 21:55
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, John Levine, 21:04
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Michael R. Brumm, 20:31
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Ted Hardie, 18:52
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Ted Hardie, 18:40
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 17:52
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, wayne, 16:53
- RE: Reality check please, Gordon Fecyk, 15:32
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Jim Lyon, 15:14
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Gordon Fecyk, 15:10
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, John Thielens, 15:03
- Reality check please, Markus Stumpf, 14:58
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Luis Bruno, 14:56
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Andrew Newton, 14:30
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Douglas Otis, 14:10
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Gordon Fecyk, 13:45
- RE: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Jim Lyon, 13:10
- Re: Towards resolution on Wildcards, Olson, Margaret, 12:38
- Towards resolution on Wildcards, Andrew Newton, 11:53
- Re: Revised Draft Minutes of the MARID Interim Meeting, Andrew Newton, 08:46
- Revised Draft Minutes of the MARID Interim Meeting, Andrew Newton, 08:07
June 08, 2004
- [bandwidth] RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Gordon Fecyk, 16:22
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, wayne, 16:17
- Re: Planning ahead: IETF meeting, John Levine, 14:34
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michel Py, 14:01
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Clifford Hammerschmidt, 13:20
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Sauer, Damon, 13:02
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Clifford Hammerschmidt, 12:30
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Sauer, Damon, 12:23
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Edward Lewis, 11:50
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Greg Connor, 11:26
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Edward Lewis, 11:20
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Jim Lyon, 11:17
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Alan DeKok, 10:30
- Re: CID sizes, Edward Lewis, 09:00
June 04, 2004
- Re: Wide-Open MADRID, Matthew Elvey, 19:52
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 17:46
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Bob Atkinson, 15:30
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Bob Atkinson, 15:28
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Ted Hardie, 15:20
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Michael Mealling, 14:55
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 14:38
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Ted Hardie, 13:55
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, wayne, 13:41
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hector Santos, 13:40
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, wayne, 12:40
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 12:17
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Bob Atkinson, 12:05
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Bob Atkinson, 12:02
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 11:28
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:34
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Eric A. Hall, 10:27
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Alan DeKok, 10:03
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Olson, Margaret, 09:52
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Joshua Baer, 08:54
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Eric A. Hall, 08:25
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08:07
- RE: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 07:50
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Eric A. Hall, 06:33
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, wayne, 06:11
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Andrew Newton, 05:46
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, william(at)elan.net, 05:32
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, wayne, 04:32
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 00:10
June 03, 2004
- Re: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Patrik Fältström, 22:55
- RE: Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Nate Leon, 22:28
- Using MX as the pointer to the other RR, Andrew Newton, 22:13
- Re: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Andrew Newton, 21:54
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 17:33
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Ted Hardie, 17:10
- [RMX all over again] RE: CID sizes, Gordon Fecyk, 15:41
- Comments on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-00, Roy Badami, 14:40
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Jim Lyon, 14:21
- Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-00, Roy Badami, 14:18
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Ryan Ordway, 14:05
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Bob Atkinson, 13:57
- RE: Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Jim Lyon, 13:39
- Re: CID sizes, Alan DeKok, 13:11
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-core-00.txt, Internet-Drafts, 12:55
- Re: CID sizes, Eric A. Hall, 12:24
- Re: CID sizes, Greg Connor, 11:31
- Re: CID sizes, Eric A. Hall, 09:27
- Re: CID sizes, Alan DeKok, 08:40
- Re: CID sizes, Eric A. Hall, 08:04
June 02, 2004
- RE: comment on draft-ietf-marid-core-00: PRA algorithm (long), Jim Lyon, 21:38
- Comments on draft-ietf-marid-core-01 xml use, Douglas Otis, 21:20
- comment on draft-ietf-marid-core-00: PRA algorithm (long), Roy Badami, 17:05
- I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-submitter-00.txt, Internet-Drafts, 13:14
- Re: Wide-Open MADRID, Luis Bruno, 07:51
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Guðbjörn S. Hreinsson, 07:06
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Jon Kyme, 06:37
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Guðbjörn S. Hreinsson, 06:00
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Jon Kyme, 04:45
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Sauer, Damon, 04:43
- Re: CID sizes, william(at)elan.net, 04:40
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Sauer, Damon, 04:01
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Jon Kyme, 01:11
June 01, 2004
- CID sizes, Eric A. Hall, 11:57
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Bob Atkinson, 11:49
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Bob Atkinson, 11:43
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Sauer, Damon, 11:36
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Bob Atkinson, 10:43
- comments on draft-delany-domainkeys-base-00.txt, Eric A. Hall, 10:37
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Greg Connor, 09:42
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Sauer, Damon, 09:01
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Jon Kyme, 08:25
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Sauer, Damon, 07:37
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Jon Kyme, 07:07
- RE: Wide-Open MADRID, Sauer, Damon, 06:22