Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/31

• Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
• Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Ted Hardie, 2004/08/31
  • Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
• Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), jpinkerton, 2004/08/31
  • Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/31
    • Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
• RE: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/31

DEPLOY: Prior Art for PRA, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31

• Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for PRA, Cyrus Daboo, 2004/08/31
• Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for PRA, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/31

RE: TECH-OMISSION: Security vulnerability - Malicious DSN attacks, Daryl Odnert, 2004/08/31

• RE: TECH-OMISSION: Security vulnerability - Malicious DSNattacks, terry, 2004/08/31
• Re: TECH-OMISSION: Security vulnerability - Malicious DSN attacks, Carl S. Gutekunst, 2004/08/31

DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31

• Re: DEPLOY: Prior Art for Sender-ID (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/31

Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/30

• Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, wayne, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Harold A'Hole, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, wayne, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/31
• RE: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Harold A'Hole, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Graham Murray, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Sendmail releases open source Sender ID milter for testing, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/31

RE: TECH-OMISSION: Security vulnerability - Malicious DSN attack s, Daryl Odnert, 2004/08/30

• Re: TECH-OMISSION: Security vulnerability - Malicious DSN attack s, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/31

Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/30

• Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/30
• Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), wayne, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
    • RE: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID supportin Courier), terry, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID supportin Courier), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking, Graham Murray, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking, Graham Murray, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
    • RE: Unencumbered Checking, terry, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking, Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID supportin Courier), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/31
  • Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/31
• Re: Unencumbered Checking (was Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier), Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/31

More on Exim, GPL and the IPR license, Peuhkurinen, Kevin, 2004/08/30

• RE: More on Exim, GPL and the IPR license, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/30
  • Re: More on Exim, GPL and the IPR license, Kevin Peuhkurinen, 2004/08/30

DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, mazieres, 2004/08/29

• RE: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, Harry Katz, 2004/08/30
  • Re: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, mazieres, 2004/08/30
• RE: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, Harry Katz, 2004/08/30
  • Re: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, mazieres, 2004/08/30
    • Re: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, Greg Connor, 2004/08/30
• RE: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, Harry Katz, 2004/08/30
  • Re: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, mazieres, 2004/08/30
  • RE: DOC-BUG: permitted use of PRA/submitter address, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/31

Microsoft Claimed IP, License Terms, etc., Nick Shelness, 2004/08/29

• Re: Microsoft Claimed IP, License Terms, etc., Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/29
  • Re: Microsoft Claimed IP, License Terms, etc., David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/29
• Re: Microsoft Claimed IP, License Terms, etc., Harold A'Hole, 2004/08/29
• Re: Microsoft Claimed IP, License Terms, etc., william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/29

Why sublicensing is important, John Levine, 2004/08/28

• RE: Why sublicensing is important, John Glube, 2004/08/28
  • RE: Why sublicensing is important, John Glube, 2004/08/29
• Why sublicensing is important, Roy Badami, 2004/08/28
  • Re: Why sublicensing is important, John R Levine, 2004/08/29
    • RE: Why sublicensing is important, John Glube, 2004/08/29
    • RE: Why sublicensing is important, John Glube, 2004/08/29
• Re: Why sublicensing is important, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/30
• RE: Why sublicensing is important, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/28
  • Re: Why sublicensing is important, Koen Martens, 2004/08/28
  • Re: Why sublicensing is important, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/28
• RE: Why sublicensing is important, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/28
  • Re: Why sublicensing is important, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/28
  • Re: Why sublicensing is important, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/29
• RE: Why sublicensing is important, Sauer, Damon, 2004/08/30

Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/27

• Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/28
  • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/28
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/28
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/28
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/28
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/28

DEPLOY: Sender ID license is acceptable, Roy Badami, 2004/08/27

• Re: DEPLOY: Sender ID license is acceptable, Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/27
  • Re: DEPLOY: Sender ID license is acceptable, David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/27
  • Re: DEPLOY: Sender ID license is acceptable, Roy Badami, 2004/08/28
• Re: DEPLOY: Sender ID license is acceptable, Alan Hodgson, 2004/08/28

DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier., Sam Varshavchik, 2004/08/27

• DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier., Roy Badami, 2004/08/27
  • Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier., Graham Murray, 2004/08/27
    • Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier., Roy Badami, 2004/08/28
    • Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier., Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/28
    • In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Roy Badami, 2004/08/28
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/28
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/28
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/28
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/28
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Roy Badami, 2004/08/30
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Roy Badami, 2004/08/30
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/30
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Douglas Otis, 2004/08/30
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Dean Anderson, 2004/08/30
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Roy Badami, 2004/08/31
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID (was: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier.), Dean Anderson, 2004/08/31
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID, David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/30
    • Re: In favour of Sender ID, Graham Murray, 2004/08/28
• Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier., Andrew Newton, 2004/08/30
  • Re: DEPLOY: SPF/Sender ID support in Courier., Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/30

RE: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/27

• RE: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/27
  • Re: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/28
    • Re: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/30
    • Re: Re: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, mazieres, 2004/08/30
    • Re: Re: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/30
    • Re: Re: Re: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, mazieres, 2004/08/30
    • Re: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/31
    • Re: Re: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces fromforgedmessages, mazieres, 2004/08/31

TECH-ERROR: Misuse of DNS Records, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/27

• Re: TECH-ERROR: Misuse of DNS Records, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/27
  • Re: TECH-ERROR: Misuse of DNS Records, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/28

on the topic of IPR, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27

• Re: on the topic of IPR, Mark, 2004/08/27
• Re: on the topic of IPR, Kevin Peuhkurinen, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27
    • Re: on the topic of IPR, Kevin Peuhkurinen, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/27
    • Re: on the topic of IPR, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/28
• Re: on the topic of IPR, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27
• Re: on the topic of IPR, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/27
• Re: on the topic of IPR, Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27
    • Re: on the topic of IPR, Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/27
    • Re: on the topic of IPR, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27
• RE: on the topic of IPR, Scott Kitterman, 2004/08/27
• Re: on the topic of IPR, George Mitchell, 2004/08/27
• Re: on the topic of IPR, David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/27
• Re: on the topic of IPR, Greg Connor, 2004/08/28
• RE: on the topic of IPR, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, kent crispin, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Kevin Peuhkurinen, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/27
    • Re: on the topic of IPR, David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/27
• FW: on the topic of IPR, Michael R. Brumm, 2004/08/27
  • Re: FW: on the topic of IPR, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/30
• RE: on the topic of IPR, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/27
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/27
    • Re: on the topic of IPR, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/28
  • Re: on the topic of IPR, David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/27
• Re: on the topic of IPR, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/28

Problematic issues with regard to last call, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27

• Re: Problematic issues with regard to last call, George Mitchell, 2004/08/27
  • Re: Problematic issues with regard to last call, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27
    • Re: Problematic issues with regard to last call, terry, 2004/08/28
  • Re: Problematic issues with regard to last call, Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/27
    • Re: Problematic issues with regard to last call, David H. Lynch Jr., 2004/08/27
    • Re: Problematic issues with regard to last call, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/28

DOC-BUG (possibly TECH-OMISSION): ietf-marid-core section 5, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/27

• RE: DOC-BUG (possibly TECH-OMISSION): ietf-marid-core section 5, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/27

DOC-BUG: section 2.1 of marid-protocol-02, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/26

• Re: DOC-BUG: section 2.1 of marid-protocol-02, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/27

TECH-OMISSION: Divergent assumptions about objectives, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/26

• Re: TECH-OMISSION: Divergent assumptions about objectives, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/27
  • Re: TECH-OMISSION: Divergent assumptions about objectives, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/30
    • Re: TECH-OMISSION: Divergent assumptions about objectives, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/30
• Re: TECH-OMISSION: Divergent assumptions about objectives, Markus Stumpf, 2004/08/27

TECH-ERROR: Duplication of version number as part of the name for SPF2 dns record (this is possibly TECH-OMISSION), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/26

• Re: TECH-ERROR: Duplication of version number as part of the name for SPF2 dns record (this is possibly TECH-OMISSION), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/27
  • Re: TECH-ERROR: Duplication of version number as part of the name for SPF2 dns record (this is possibly TECH-OMISSION), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/27
  • Re: TECH-ERROR: Duplication of version number as part of the name for SPF2 dns record (this is possibly TECH-OMISSION), Roy Badami, 2004/08/27

RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forgedmessages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26

• RE: TECH-OMISSION: Legal liability for creating bounces from forgedmessages, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/26
• Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forgedmessages, mazieres, 2004/08/26

RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26

• RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/26
  • RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, John Glube, 2004/08/26
• RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Michael R. Brumm, 2004/08/27
• Re: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/29
• Re: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/29
• RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/27
  • Message not available
    • RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/29
• RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/27

RE: DEPLOY - IP, HELO & touch count. DOC-BUG too., Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26

• RE: DEPLOY - IP, HELO & touch count. DOC-BUG too., Douglas Otis, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY - IP, HELO & touch count. DOC-BUG too., Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26
  • RE: DEPLOY - IP, HELO & touch count. DOC-BUG too., Douglas Otis, 2004/08/26
  • message-based vs. channel-based, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY - IP, HELO & touch count. DOC-BUG too., Jim Lyon, 2004/08/27
  • Reputation services for SenderID, John Leslie, 2004/08/27
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/27
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Mark C. Langston, 2004/08/27
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/27
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, mazieres, 2004/08/29
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, John Leslie, 2004/08/30
    • Re: Reputation services for SenderID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/30
  • Message not available
    • RE: DEPLOY - IP, HELO & touch count. DOC-BUG too., Douglas Otis, 2004/08/28

RE: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26

• Re: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, David Blacka, 2004/08/27
• RE: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/27
  • Re: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, David Blacka, 2004/08/27
  • RE: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/27

DEPLOY: IPR/GPL, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/26

• Re: DEPLOY: IPR/GPL, wayne, 2004/08/26

AOL's stance on SenderID and IPR issues, Carl Hutzler, 2004/08/26

• Re: AOL's stance on SenderID and IPR issues, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
• Re: AOL's stance on SenderID and IPR issues, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/26
  • Re: AOL's stance on SenderID and IPR issues, Matt Sergeant, 2004/08/27
  • Re: AOL's stance on SenderID and IPR issues, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/27

RE: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on t he SenderID license?), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26

• Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on t he SenderID license?), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/27
  • Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on t he SenderID license?), Margaret Olson, 2004/08/27
    • Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on t he SenderID license?), Ryan Ordway, 2004/08/27
    • Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on t he SenderID license?), Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/27
    • Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on t he SenderID license?), Mattias Webjörn Eriksson, 2004/08/27
• Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on t he SenderID license?), Tripp Cox, 2004/08/27

RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I belie ve), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26

• RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I belie ve), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26
  • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I belie ve), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I belie ve), David Blacka, 2004/08/26

DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/25

• RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), John Glube, 2004/08/26
  • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Jeff Macdonald, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Jeff Macdonald, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/27
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Graham Murray, 2004/08/27
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), John Glube, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), David Blacka, 2004/08/27
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/27
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), David Blacka, 2004/08/27
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), John Glube, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/27
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/31
    • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/31
• Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Jim Fenton, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), David Blacka, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
• Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26
  • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/26
  • RE: DEPLOY: Over-running TXT dataspace in FQDN (-protocol I believe), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/27

Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, wayne, 2004/08/25

• Re: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Waitman C Gobble II, 2004/08/25
• RE: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/25
  • RE: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, George Mitchell, 2004/08/25
  • Re: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/26
  • Re: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Mark, 2004/08/26
  • acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?), wayne, 2004/08/26
    • Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/26
    • Re: acceptable licenses (Was: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?), Andrew Newton, 2004/08/26
  • RE: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Ryan Ordway, 2004/08/26
• RE: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26
• RE: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26
  • RE: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Ryan Ordway, 2004/08/26
  • Re: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license?, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/26
    • Re: Can there be an early decision on the SenderID license? (typo fixed), Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/26

DEPLOY: Misuse of Resent-From, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/25

• RE: DEPLOY: Misuse of Resent-From, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26

DEPLOY - reference implementation, Nate Leon, 2004/08/25

• Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Chuck Mead, 2004/08/25
  • Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Mark, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Mark, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Mark, 2004/08/26
• Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY - reference implementation, Mark, 2004/08/26

DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/24

• Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/24
• Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Mark C. Langston, 2004/08/24
• Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
• Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, wayne, 2004/08/25
  • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Ryan Ordway, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Chuck Mead, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Chip Mefford, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, George Mitchell, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Graham Murray, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements - licese terms are a blow to IETF process, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements - licese terms are a blow to IETF process, Mattias Webjörn Eriksson, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Koen Martens, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Mark C. Langston, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Ted Hardie, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Mark C. Langston, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Chuck Mead, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/25
    • RE: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, terry, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Koen Martens, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, terry, 2004/08/26
    • Re: [marid] Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Benjamin Damm, 2004/08/25
• Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/25
• Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/25
• Re: DEPLOY/IPR: Fundamental Disagreements, or Get On With It, Kevin Peuhkurinen, 2004/08/26

RE: DEPLOY: Creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/24

• RE: DEPLOY: Creating bounces from forged messages, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/24

RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged mess ages, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24

• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/24
• Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged mess ages, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged mess ages, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged mess ages, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged mess ages, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24

DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Graham Murray, 2004/08/24

• Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Ryan Ordway, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Graham Murray, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Koen Martens, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Koen Martens, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Mark C. Langston, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
• RE: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, terry, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY - IPR on Sender-ID not sufficiently disclosed, Harry Katz, 2004/08/24

DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/24

• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, John Glube, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/24
  • DEPLOY: Creating bounces from forged messages, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Mark, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Graham Murray, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Mark, 2004/08/25
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, John Glube, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jeff Macdonald, 2004/08/25
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/25
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/24
  • TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, John Glube, 2004/08/24
    • RE: TECH OMISSION: Stronger checks against email forgery, John Glube, 2004/08/25
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/27
  • RE: DEPLOY: Legal liability for creating bounces from forged messages, terry, 2004/08/28

DOC-BUG: two IPv6 problems in -protocol, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/24

• Re: DOC-BUG: two IPv6 problems in -protocol, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/24

DOC-BUG: typo in -protocol, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/24

• Re: DOC-BUG: typo in -protocol, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/24

DEPLOY: Sendmail position on Sender Id, Eric Allman, 2004/08/23

• Re: DEPLOY: Santronics position on Sender Id, Hector Santos, 2004/08/26

DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Harry Katz, 2004/08/23

• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/23
• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/24
• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Roy Arends, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Eric Allman, 2004/08/24
• Message not available
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Harry Katz, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, wayne, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Roy Arends, 2004/08/25
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft's Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Harry Katz, 2004/08/25

DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Harry Katz, 2004/08/23

• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Eric Allman, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Chip Mefford, 2004/08/25
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/25
• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, gmc, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, terry, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Mark C. Langston, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, George Mitchell, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, wayne, 2004/08/25
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Paul Iadonisi, 2004/08/27
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/23
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Harry Katz, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Mark C. Langston, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, terry, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/24
  • Microsoft (lack of) replies (Was: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/25
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Koen Martens, 2004/08/25
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/25
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, wayne, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Yakov Shafranovich, 2004/08/26
    • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, terry, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Ryan Ordway, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, wayne, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/26
    • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Jeff Macdonald, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/26
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/26
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, wayne, 2004/08/26
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License FAQ, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/26

DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Harry Katz, 2004/08/23

• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/24
• Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, terry, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, terry, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Chip Mefford, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Graham Murray, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, terry, 2004/08/24
  • Re: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Chip Mefford, 2004/08/24
• RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/24
  • RE: DEPLOY: Microsoft Royalty Free Sender ID Patent License, terry, 2004/08/24

TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/23

• Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, ned . freed, 2004/08/23
• Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/23
• Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/23
  • Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/24
    • DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/24
    • Re: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/24
  • Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/24
• Message not available
  • Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Ólafur Guðmundsson, 2004/08/28
    • Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/31
• Re: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Ted Hardie, 2004/08/24
• RE: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/26
• RE: TECH-ERROR: DNS Record Types, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/31

some other questions/comments, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/23

• IDN and Sender-ID (Was: some other questions/comments, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/23

TECH-ERROR: PTR should not be recommended against in -protocol, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/23

• Re: TECH-ERROR: PTR should not be recommended against in -protocol, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/23

TECH-OMISSION: billing.victim.com is possible, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/23

• Re: TECH-OMISSION: billing.victim.com is possible, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/23

TECH-OMISSION: failure action is too restrictive in -core, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/23

• Re: TECH-OMISSION: failure action is too restrictive in -core, Steven G. Willis, 2004/08/24
• RE: TECH-OMISSION: failure action is too restrictive in -core, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/23

TECH-OMISSION: leave open other authentication methods in -core, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/23

• TECH-OMISSION: Security considerations and limit scope, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/30
  • Re: TECH-OMISSION: Security considerations and limit scope, mazieres, 2004/08/30

[DEPLOY] Privacy and disclosure of addresses in -core, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/23

• Re: [DEPLOY] Privacy and disclosure of addresses in -core, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/24

Working Group Last Call on Sender ID documents, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/23

• Re: Working Group Last Call on Sender ID documents, John Leslie, 2004/08/23
  • Re: Working Group Last Call on Sender ID documents, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/23
  • Deadline for IPR filings, John Glube, 2004/08/23
    • Re: Deadline for IPR filings, Marshall Rose, 2004/08/24
• Re: Working Group Last Call on Sender ID documents, Daniel Quinlan, 2004/08/23
  • Re: Working Group Last Call on Sender ID documents, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/23
• DEPLOY - IP, HELO & touch count. DOC-BUG too., Matthew Elvey, 2004/08/24

RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter (fwd), Dean Anderson, 2004/08/21

• SPF is not an antispam technology, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/21
  • Re: SPF is not an antispam technology, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/22
    • Re: SPF is not an antispam technology, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/22
    • Re: SPF is not an antispam technology, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/22
  • Re: SPF is not an antispam technology, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/22
  • Re: SPF is not an antispam technology, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/22
• DEPLOY: spam problem solved, addressed, or ???, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/24

RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/19

• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/19

There can be more than one, Andrew W. Donoho, 2004/08/19

• Re: There can be more than one, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/19

IP Address spoofing, Nate Leon, 2004/08/18

• Re: IP Address spoofing, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/19
  • Re: IP Address spoofing, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/19
    • Re: IP Address spoofing, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/19
• Re: IP Address spoofing, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/19
• RE: IP Address spoofing, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/18

Sender-ID and last hop validation, Nate Leon, 2004/08/18

• Re: Sender-ID and last hop validation, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/18
  • Re: Sender-ID and last hop validation, Graham Murray, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Sender-ID and last hop validation, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/19
• Re: Sender-ID and last hop validation, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/19

RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/18

• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/19
  • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/19
• Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, wayne, 2004/08/19

Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Nate Leon, 2004/08/18

• RE: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Harry Katz, 2004/08/18
  • RE: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/18
  • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/18
    • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/18
  • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Graham Murray, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Graham Murray, 2004/08/19
• RE: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Daryl Odnert, 2004/08/18
  • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/18
    • Re: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Mark Baugher, 2004/08/19
• RE: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Harry Katz, 2004/08/19
  • RE: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, John Glube, 2004/08/20
• RE: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/22
  • RE: Forged Sender (Resent-From) attacks, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/23

I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt, Internet-Drafts, 2004/08/18

• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/19

RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Daryl Odnert, 2004/08/18

• Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/18
• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Sauer, Damon, 2004/08/18
  • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/18
    • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/18
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/18
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/18
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/18
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/20
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/20
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/23
    • Re: Solution For Trojans, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/23
• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Daryl Odnert, 2004/08/18
  • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Roy Badami, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Roy Badami, 2004/08/19
    • blowback and SPF classic, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/20
    • Back-Door Bounce strategy prevention, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/20
• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Daryl Odnert, 2004/08/19
  • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, John Glube, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Roy Badami, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, terry, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Roy Badami, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, terry, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Roy Badami, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, terry, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Roy Badami, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/19
    • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Roy Badami, 2004/08/19
    • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Graham Murray, 2004/08/20
    • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/20
    • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Roy Badami, 2004/08/20
• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Daryl Odnert, 2004/08/19
  • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, John Glube, 2004/08/21

Not a point of order RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed respo nse to MARID WG Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/18

• Re: Not a point of order RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed respo nse to MARID WG Charter, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/18

RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/18

• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Tony Finch, 2004/08/18
• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/18
• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/18
  • RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Chart er, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/18

Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/18

• Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/18
  • Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/18
• Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Marshall Rose, 2004/08/18
• Re: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/18
• RE: Point of Order: Incomplete, flawed response to MARID WG Charter, Sauer, Damon, 2004/08/18

But what about accreditation/reputation?, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/17

• Re: But what about accreditation/reputation?, John Levine, 2004/08/17
• Re: But what about accreditation/reputation?, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/17
  • Re: But what about accreditation/reputation?, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/18

RE: [Asrg] REDIRECt to ASRG RE: Reputation systems, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/17

• RE: [Asrg] REDIRECt to ASRG RE: Reputation systems, John R Levine, 2004/08/17
• Re: [Asrg] REDIRECt to ASRG RE: Reputation systems, wayne, 2004/08/17

REDIRECt to ASRG RE: Reputation systems, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/16

• Re: REDIRECt to ASRG RE: Reputation systems, John R Levine, 2004/08/16

I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt, Internet-Drafts, 2004/08/16

• Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt, John Leslie, 2004/08/18
  • Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt, wayne, 2004/08/19
    • Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt, Tripp Cox, 2004/08/19
    • Allowing other scopes on SPF2 records (Was: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt), wayne, 2004/08/20
    • Re: Allowing other scopes on SPF2 records (Was: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt), Tripp Cox, 2004/08/20
    • Re: Allowing other scopes on SPF2 records, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/20
    • Re: Allowing other scopes on SPF2 records (Was: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt), Douglas Otis, 2004/08/20
    • Allowing other scopes on SPF2 records (Was: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-01.txt), Roy Badami, 2004/08/20

Reputation systems, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/15

• Re: Reputation systems, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 2004/08/18
• RE: Reputation systems, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/16
  • RE: Reputation systems, Tony Finch, 2004/08/16
  • Re: Reputation systems, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/16
  • Re: Reputation systems, John Levine, 2004/08/16
• RE: Reputation systems, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/16
  • RE: Reputation systems, Tony Finch, 2004/08/17

New draft-ietf-marid-core-03 and draft-ietf-marid-pra-00, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/13

• RE: New draft-ietf-marid-core-03 and draft-ietf-marid-pra-00, Nate Leon, 2004/08/18

Changes for protocol-01, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/13

• Changes for protocol-01, Roy Badami, 2004/08/13
  • Re: Changes for protocol-01, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/13
• Re: Changes for protocol-01, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/14
  • Re: Changes for protocol-01, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/14
    • timestamps / 2476bis / PRA (was: Changes for protocol-01), Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/16

On the name of the SUBMITTER= parameter, Roy Badami, 2004/08/12

• Re: On the name of the SUBMITTER= parameter, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/12

Additional security consideration for marid-core, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/11

• Re: Additional security consideration for marid-core, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/11
• RE: Additional security consideration for marid-core, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/12
  • RE: Additional security consideration for marid-core, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/12

Changes in the queue for marid-submitter-03, Harry Katz, 2004/08/11

• Re: Changes in the queue for marid-submitter-03, ned . freed, 2004/08/11
  • Re: Changes in the queue for marid-submitter-03, Eric Allman, 2004/08/13
    • Re: Changes in the queue for marid-submitter-03, ned . freed, 2004/08/13
    • Re: Changes in the queue for marid-submitter-03, Eric Allman, 2004/08/13
  • Re: Changes in the queue for marid-submitter-03, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/13

"Recognized" mailing lists, RE: What Meng said, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/11

• Re: "Recognized" mailing lists, RE: What Meng said, Shevek, 2004/08/11
  • Re: "Recognized" mailing lists, RE: What Meng said, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/11
    • Re: 'Recognized' mailing lists, RE: What Meng said, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/11
    • Re: 'Recognized' mailing lists, RE: What Meng said, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/13
• RE: "Recognized" mailing lists, RE: What Meng said, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/11

What Meng said, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/11

• Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, ned . freed, 2004/08/11
• Re: What Meng said, Tony Finch, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/11
• Re: What Meng said, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/11
  • Re: missing submitter, was What Meng said, John Levine, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, Murray S. Kucherawy, 2004/08/11
• Re: What Meng said, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/11
• Re: What Meng said, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, ned . freed, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, Tony Finch, 2004/08/12
  • Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/12
  • Re: What Meng said, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/12
    • Re: What Meng said, Andrew W. Donoho, 2004/08/13
    • Re: What Meng said, Carl S. Gutekunst, 2004/08/13
    • Re: What Meng said, Carl S. Gutekunst, 2004/08/13
    • Re: What Meng said, Andrew W. Donoho, 2004/08/13
    • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/13
    • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/13
    • Re: What Meng said, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/14
    • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/15
    • Re: What Meng said, John Leslie, 2004/08/15
    • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/15
    • Re: What Meng said, John Leslie, 2004/08/16
    • Re: What Meng said, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/16
    • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/16
    • Re: What Meng said, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/15
    • Re: What Meng said, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/15
    • Re: What Meng said, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/16
    • Re: What Meng said, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/16
    • Re: What Meng said, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Tripp Cox, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/17
    • Checking MAIL FROM (was: What Meng said), Roy Badami, 2004/08/17
    • Checking MAIL FROM (was: What Meng said), Roy Badami, 2004/08/17
    • Re: What Meng said, Andrew W. Donoho, 2004/08/17
    • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/17
• RE: What Meng said, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/11
  • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/11
    • Re: What Meng said, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/11
    • RE: What Meng said, John Glube, 2004/08/11
• RE: What Meng said, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/11
  • Re: What Meng said, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/11
• RE: What Meng said, Harry Katz, 2004/08/11
• RE: What Meng said, Harry Katz, 2004/08/16
• RE: What Meng said, Sauer, Damon, 2004/08/17

draft minutes of the San Diego meeting, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/11

• IPR (Was: draft minutes of the San Diego meeting), Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/18
  • Re: IPR (Was: draft minutes of the San Diego meeting), Andrew Newton, 2004/08/18

Analysis of SPF benefits for reduced filtering, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/10

• Re: Analysis of SPF benefits for reduced filtering, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/10
  • Re: Analysis of SPF benefits for reduced filtering, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/11
    • Re: Analysis of SPF benefits for reduced filtering, Philip Miller, 2004/08/14
    • Re: Analysis of SPF benefits for reduced filtering, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/14
• RE: Analysis of SPF benefits for reduced filtering, Sauer, Damon, 2004/08/10

Wildcards not useable, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/10

• Re: Wildcards not useable, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/10

you must fill your zones with TXT records, Tony Finch, 2004/08/10

• Re: you must fill your zones with TXT records, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/10
  • Re: you must fill your zones with TXT records, Murray S. Kucherawy, 2004/08/10
• RE: you must fill your zones with TXT records, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/10
  • RE: you must fill your zones with TXT records, Tony Finch, 2004/08/11
• RE: you must fill your zones with TXT records, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/11
  • RE: you must fill your zones with TXT records, Andriy G. Tereshchenko, 2004/08/11

change of version string, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/09

• Re: change of version string, Ted Hardie, 2004/08/10
  • Re: change of version string, wayne, 2004/08/10
    • Re: change of version string, Ted Hardie, 2004/08/10
    • Re: change of version string, wayne, 2004/08/10
    • Re: change of version string, kent crispin, 2004/08/10
    • Re: change of version string, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/11
    • RE: change of version string, Scott Kitterman, 2004/08/19
    • RE: change of version string, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/19
    • RE: change of version string, Scott Kitterman, 2004/08/19
    • RE: change of version string, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/19
    • RE: change of version string, Scott Kitterman, 2004/08/19
    • RE: change of version string, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/20
    • RE: change of version string, Scott Kitterman, 2004/08/20
    • Re: change of version string, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/20
    • Re: change of version string, Roy Badami, 2004/08/20
    • Re: change of version string, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/11
  • Re: change of version string, David Blacka, 2004/08/10
  • Re: change of version string, George Mitchell, 2004/08/11
    • Re: change of version string, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/11
• Re: change of version string, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/10
  • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, John Levine, 2004/08/10
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, David Blacka, 2004/08/10
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, John Levine, 2004/08/10
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Peter Koch, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/10
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, David Blacka, 2004/08/10
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Michael Thomas, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/10
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, John Levine, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/11
    • Re: record size and wild cards, John Levine, 2004/08/12
    • Re: record size and wild cards, was change of version string, Michael Thomas, 2004/08/11
  • Re: change of version string, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/10

Upcoming changes in protocol draft, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/09

• Re: Upcoming changes in protocol draft, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/09
• Re: Upcoming changes in protocol draft, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/11
• RE: Upcoming changes in protocol draft, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/09

Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, Michael R. Brumm, 2004/08/07

• Re: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, ned . freed, 2004/08/07
  • RE: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, Michael R. Brumm, 2004/08/07
    • RE: Will Accepting Using PRA Get You Blacklisted?, Michael R. Brumm, 2004/08/07
    • Re: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, Graham Murray, 2004/08/07
    • SUBMITTER/PRA Allows Spread of Viruses, Too (was: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?), Michael R. Brumm, 2004/08/11
• Re: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, Shevek, 2004/08/09
  • Re: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, Graham Murray, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, Shevek, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Will Accepting SUBMITTER Get You Blacklisted?, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/09

Security issue: Minority installed base of compatible MUAs?, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/07

• Re: Security issue: Minority installed base of compatible MUAs?, Rand Wacker, 2004/08/09
  • Re: Security issue: Minority installed base of compatible MUAs?, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Security issue: Minority installed base of compatible MUAs?, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Security issue: Minority installed base of compatible MUAs?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/10
    • Re: Security issue: Minority installed base of compatible MUAs?, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/10

sender_agents modifier, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/06

• RE: sender_agents modifier, Jim Lyon, 2004/08/06
  • RE: sender_agents modifier, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/06

The real reason MARID won't work, RE: testing of MARID proposals, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/06

• RE: The real reason MARID won't work, RE: testing of MARID proposals, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/06
  • RE: The real reason MARID won't work, RE: testing of MARID proposals, Murray S. Kucherawy, 2004/08/06
    • Re: The real reason MARID won't work, RE: testing of MARID proposals, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/06

testing of MARID proposals, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/06

• Re: testing of MARID proposals, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/06
• Re: testing of MARID proposals, wayne, 2004/08/06
  • Re: testing of MARID proposals, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/06
• Re: testing of MARID proposals, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/06
• milestones for CSV, John Glube, 2004/08/06
  • Re: milestones for CSV, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/07
• RE: testing of MARID proposals, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/06

Some statistics from the SPF-discuss list, wayne, 2004/08/05

• Re: Some statistics from the SPF-discuss list, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/05
  • Re: Some statistics from the SPF-discuss list, Philip Miller, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Some statistics from the SPF-discuss list, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/05

changing the SPF record version number?, wayne, 2004/08/05

• Re: changing the SPF record version number?, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/07

marid-submitter-02: Recipient's point of view, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/05

• Re: marid-submitter-02: Recipient's point of view, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/05
  • Re: marid-submitter-02: Recipient's point of view, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/05
    • Re: marid-submitter-02: Recipient's point of view, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/06
    • SUBMITTER and PRA, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/06
    • Re: SUBMITTER and PRA, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/06
    • Re: SUBMITTER and PRA, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/06
    • Re: marid-submitter-02: Recipient's point of view, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/06
    • Re: marid-submitter-02: Recipient's point of view, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/06
    • Re: marid-submitter-02: Recipient's point of view, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/06

Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/05

• Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, ned . freed, 2004/08/05
  • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, ned . freed, 2004/08/06
  • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Shevek, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Margaret Olson, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Dave Crocker, 2004/08/17
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, ned . freed, 2004/08/09
  • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/09
• RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Harry Katz, 2004/08/09
  • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Shevek, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Philip Miller, 2004/08/09
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Chris Haynes, 2004/08/09
  • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, John Glube, 2004/08/09
  • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Michael Thomas, 2004/08/11
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/11
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Michael Thomas, 2004/08/11
• RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Harry Katz, 2004/08/09
  • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Shevek, 2004/08/10
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/10
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/10
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/10
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/11
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/12
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/12
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/12
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/12
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/12
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Graham Murray, 2004/08/12
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/13
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/13
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/13
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Graham Murray, 2004/08/13
    • Re: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/14
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Mark Shewmaker, 2004/08/13
    • RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/14
    • sender_agents, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/15
• RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Harry Katz, 2004/08/09
• RE: Does marid-submitter-02 really make sense?, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/12

So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, John Glube, 2004/08/04

• Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/05
  • Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, wayne, 2004/08/05
    • Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/05
    • Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, wayne, 2004/08/05
• RE: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, John Glube, 2004/08/05
  • Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, Guillaume Filion, 2004/08/05
    • RE: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, John Glube, 2004/08/05
    • Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/07
    • Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, Graham Murray, 2004/08/07
    • Re: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/07
• RE: So ... did Dewey beat Truman?, John Glube, 2004/08/05

short-term milestones, Marshall Rose, 2004/08/04

• Re: short-term milestones, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/05
  • Re: short-term milestones, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/05
• Re: short-term milestones, Marshall Rose, 2004/08/16

Minutes or summary?, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/04

• Re: Minutes or summary?, Marshall Rose, 2004/08/04

Slide decks from MARID meetings, Harry Katz, 2004/08/04

• Re: Slide decks from MARID meetings, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/04
  • Re: Slide decks from MARID meetings, Marshall Rose, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Slide decks from MARID meetings, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/05
  • Re: Slide decks from MARID meetings, Philip Miller, 2004/08/04
• Re: Slide decks from MARID meetings...As PDF, Andrew W. Donoho, 2004/08/04
  • Re: Slide decks from MARID meetings...As PDF, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/04
  • Re: Slide decks from MARID meetings...As PDF, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/05
• RE: Slide decks from MARID meetings, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/04

Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/04

• Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/04
  • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Tony Finch, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/04
  • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Tony Finch, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/04
  • Re: Another question on draft-ietf-marid-submitter-02, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/04

Discussing CSV, Mark Lentczner, 2004/08/03

• Re: Discussing CSV, John Leslie, 2004/08/03
• A suggestion concerning Sender-ID/Submitter, John Glube, 2004/08/03
  • Re: A suggestion concerning Sender-ID/Submitter, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/03
  • Re: A suggestion concerning Sender-ID/Submitter, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/04
• Re: Discussing CSV, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/04

Re: Schedule for Sender-ID, wayne, 2004/08/03

• Re: Schedule for Sender-ID, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/03

Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Andrew Newton, 2004/08/03

• Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/03
  • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, wayne, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Douglas Otis, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, John Leslie, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/03
    • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, John Leslie, 2004/08/08
    • SPF/FROM-HDR (was: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID), Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/04
    • Re: SPF/FROM-HDR (was: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID), wayne, 2004/08/04
    • Re: SPF/FROM-HDR (was: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID), Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/04
    • Re: SPF/FROM-HDR (was: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID), wayne, 2004/08/04
    • RE: SPF/FROM-HDR (was: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID), John Glube, 2004/08/04
    • Re: SPF/FROM-HDR, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/05
    • Re: SPF/FROM-HDR, Frank Ellermann, 2004/08/05
    • "unified spf", Meng Weng Wong, 2004/08/06
    • Re: "unified spf", Dave Crocker, 2004/08/06
    • RE: "unified spf", James Pullicino, 2004/08/07
• RE: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Harry Katz, 2004/08/03
  • Re: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/03
  • RE: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/03
  • RE: IPR Disclosure for Sender-ID, John Glube, 2004/08/03

A spammer subscribed to this list ?, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/02

• Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ?, Pete Resnick, 2004/08/02
  • Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ?, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/02
• RE: A spammer subscribed to this list ?, Ryan Malayter, 2004/08/02
  • Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ?, Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/04
  • RE: A spammer subscribed to this list ?, Pete Resnick, 2004/08/04
• RE: A spammer subscribed to this list ?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/04
  • Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Alan DeKok, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Hadmut Danisch, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), wayne, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Rand Wacker, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammersubscribed to this list ? ), Douglas Otis, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Alan DeKok, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/04
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Alan DeKok, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Alan DeKok, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Eric A. Hall, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), wayne, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Alan DeKok, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Stephane Bortzmeyer, 2004/08/06
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems (was Re: A spammer subscribed to this list ? ), Alan DeKok, 2004/08/06
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems, Graham Murray, 2004/08/05
    • Re: Interaction with anti-spam systems, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/05

Will there be video of the MARID sessions?, wayne, 2004/08/02

• Re: Will there be video of the MARID sessions?, Jim Fenton, 2004/08/03
  • RE: Will there be video of the MARID sessions?, Tek, 2004/08/03

RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/01

• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/01
• Re: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/01
  • Re: How is SPF different from RMX?, Graham Murray, 2004/08/02
  • Re: How is SPF different from RMX?, Michel Bouissou, 2004/08/02
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, John Glube, 2004/08/02
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/02
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, John Glube, 2004/08/02
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/10
    • Re: How is SPF different from RMX?, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/11
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, John Glube, 2004/08/11
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/11
  • Isn't spam a Security Problem? (was Re: How is SPF different from RMX?), Andrew W. Donoho, 2004/08/02
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/02
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/02
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/02
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/02
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/02
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/02
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/02
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/03
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Tony Finch, 2004/08/04
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/02
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/03
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, william(at)elan.net, 2004/08/03
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/06
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/03
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/10
    • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/10
    • Re: How is SPF different from RMX?, Alan DeKok, 2004/08/11
    • Re: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/11
    • Re: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/11
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/04
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Tony Finch, 2004/08/04
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 2004/08/04
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Tony Finch, 2004/08/04
• RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Gordon Fecyk, 2004/08/11
  • RE: How is SPF different from RMX?, Dean Anderson, 2004/08/13