IETF Discussion (date)
May 31, 2003
- Re: Spam, Eric A. Hall, 21:14
- Re: Spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 20:57
- Re: Spam, Eric A. Hall, 20:14
- Re: Spam, Paul Vixie, 19:34
- Re: The IETF_Censored mailing list, Tim Chown, 19:28
- Re: Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here), Tim Chown, 19:24
- The IETF_Censored mailing list, Super-User, 18:34
- Re: Last 7 days on the IETF list, Dave Aronson, 18:23
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Peter Deutsch, 18:21
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Aronson, 18:11
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Russ Allbery, 16:43
- Re: Spam, Anthony Atkielski, 16:13
- Re: Spam, Keith Moore, 16:10
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 15:40
- RE: Spam, Christian de Larrinaga, 15:40
- Re: Spam, Keith Moore, 15:37
- Re: Spam, Anthony Atkielski, 15:27
- Re: Spam, Paul Vixie, 15:22
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, David Morris, 15:20
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, David Morris, 15:03
- Re: Spam, Dave Crocker, 14:39
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 14:13
- Re: Spam, Paul Vixie, 13:18
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Valdis . Kletnieks, 10:02
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 08:43
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 08:39
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 07:57
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 05:24
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 04:58
May 30, 2003
- Re: Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here), Randy Bush, 22:19
- RE: Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here), Michel Py, 21:38
- RE: Last 7 days on the IETF list, Michel Py, 21:26
- Re: Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here), Dean Anderson, 19:46
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 19:19
- Private message from John Klensin, Dean Anderson, 19:09
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Valdis . Kletnieks, 19:09
- Re: Last 7 days on the IETF list, shogunx, 18:53
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 18:50
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 18:48
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 18:40
- Re: Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here), Pete Resnick, 18:33
- Re: The utilitiy of ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org is at stake here, grenville armitage, 18:13
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 18:12
- Re: Last 7 days on the IETF list, william, 17:59
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 17:39
- Re: Last 7 days on the IETF list, Anthony Atkielski, 17:28
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 17:23
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Peter Deutsch, 17:18
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 17:17
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 17:17
- Re: The utilitiy of ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 17:17
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Crocker, 16:48
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Crocker, 16:38
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Valdis . Kletnieks, 16:15
- Re: Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here), Dean Anderson, 16:12
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Einar Stefferud, 16:10
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Vernon Schryver, 15:13
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 14:57
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 14:37
- RE: Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Raghurama 'REDDY', 14:27
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 14:10
- Answering questions and defamation (was: RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here), John C Klensin, 14:09
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 13:28
- Re: Spam, Eric A. Hall, 13:20
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 13:03
- Re: Spam, John Stracke, 12:55
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, David Morris, 12:28
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John C Klensin, 12:23
- Last 7 days on the IETF list, Rob Austein, 12:18
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model, Paul Vixie, 12:07
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eliot Lear, 12:03
- Re: Spam, Paul Vixie, 11:58
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 11:57
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 11:43
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 11:32
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 11:30
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 11:19
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Peter Deutsch, 11:09
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 11:08
- RE: The utilitiy of ietf(_at_)ietf(_dot_)org is at stake here, Schliesser, Benson, 10:48
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 10:47
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Stephen Kent, 10:43
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 10:30
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 10:28
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 09:47
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 09:42
- Re: spam, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 09:25
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 08:11
- Re: crypto-spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 08:07
- Re: spam, Dave Aronson, 08:05
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 07:18
- crypto-spam, Dave Aronson, 07:17
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model, John Kristoff, 07:10
- Re: crypto-spam, Dave Aronson, 07:05
- crypto-spam, Dave Aronson, 06:54
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John Loughney, 06:37
- Re: spam, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 06:33
- Re: Spam, Andrew Shore, 04:14
- Re: spam, Graham Klyne, 01:13
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:47
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here/spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:46
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 00:42
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:33
- Re: spam - The IETF list is spam!, Anthony Atkielski, 00:27
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:23
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 00:12
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 00:06
May 29, 2003
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Crocker, 23:51
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 20:09
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 19:46
- Home agent discovery, Fritz F. Saad, 19:45
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 19:29
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, David Morris, 19:29
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Michael Thomas, 18:33
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model, John Stracke, 18:22
- RE: spam - The IETF list is spam!, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 18:22
- RE: spam, Michael Thomas, 18:20
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here/spam, TABAKIS, ELEAS (AIT), 18:13
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 18:11
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 18:11
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 18:01
- RE: spam, Christian Huitema, 18:00
- RE: spam, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 17:54
- RE: spam, Michael Thomas, 17:50
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 17:32
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 17:28
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model (was: Re: spam), Theodore Ts'o, 17:23
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 17:21
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 17:21
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 17:09
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 16:53
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 16:47
- RE: spam, Christian Huitema, 16:47
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, David Morris, 16:39
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 16:35
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 16:28
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John Stracke, 16:13
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Scott W Brim, 16:05
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Vernon Schryver, 16:04
- Re: spam, Clint Chaplin, 16:02
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 15:48
- Re: spam, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 15:43
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 15:43
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 15:38
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 15:38
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 15:19
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eliot Lear, 15:07
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John Morris, 15:07
- Re: spam, Andrew Shore, 14:48
- Re: spam, Dave Aronson, 14:42
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 14:33
- Re: spam, Michael Thomas, 14:30
- Re: spam, Scott Francis, 14:29
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Peter Deutsch, 14:18
- Re: spam, Scott Francis, 14:04
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Crocker, 14:03
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 13:53
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 13:53
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 13:46
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 13:14
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 13:14
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 12:57
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Crocker, 12:04
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Alain Durand, 11:51
- Re: spam, Fritz F. Saad, 11:26
- Re: Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 11:17
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 11:17
- spam, Bill Cunningham, 10:39
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 10:23
- Re: spam, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 10:06
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 09:04
- Re: spam, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 08:18
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John Morris, 08:14
- Re: spam, J. Noel Chiappa, 06:26
- Re: fighting spam, the protocol route, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 06:09
- Re[2]: spam, Richard Welty, 05:53
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Einar Stefferud, 01:48
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model (was: Re: spam), Einar Stefferud, 01:32
- Re: spam, John Loughney, 01:05
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 01:05
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:45
May 28, 2003
- Re: spam, Doug Sauder, 23:47
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Paul Vixie, 23:46
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 22:23
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Anthony Atkielski, 21:57
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 21:52
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 21:48
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 21:43
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model (was: Re: spam), Peter Deutsch, 21:26
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 21:03
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model (was: Re: spam), Peter Deutsch, 20:36
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model (was: Re: spam), Valdis . Kletnieks, 20:06
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Einar Stefferud, 19:53
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), John C Klensin, 19:20
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Crocker, 18:53
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Richard Shockey, 18:53
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Steven M. Bellovin, 18:18
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eliot Lear, 17:02
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), David Morris, 16:38
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), David Morris, 16:30
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), S Woodside, 16:28
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 15:59
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 15:20
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dave Crocker, 15:04
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 14:24
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 14:23
- Re: A peer-to-peer trust system model (was: Re: spam), Einar Stefferud, 14:13
- RE: spam, Paul Hoffman / IMC, 14:09
- RE: spam, Tony Hain, 13:55
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Einar Stefferud, 13:54
- Re: spam, Rick Wesson, 13:54
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 13:19
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 13:12
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 13:11
- Re: spam, John Stracke, 13:02
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 12:56
- Re: spam, David Morris, 12:54
- A peer-to-peer trust system model (was: Re: spam), Peter Deutsch, 12:49
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Anthony Atkielski, 12:44
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 12:28
- Re: spam, S Woodside, 12:17
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 12:17
- Re: spam - The IETF list is spam!, Anthony Atkielski, 12:13
- RE: spam, David Morris, 12:12
- RE: spam, Tony Hain, 12:07
- Re: spam, Terry Gray, 11:42
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, David Morris, 11:41
- Re: spam, David Morris, 11:26
- RE: spam, Christian Huitema, 11:07
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), David Morris, 11:01
- Re: spam, Keith Moore, 10:44
- RE: spam, Tony Hain, 10:21
- Re: spam, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 09:32
- Re: spam - The IETF list is spam!, Andrew Newton, 07:52
- Re: spam, John Stracke, 07:30
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), Rebecca L. Page, 07:28
- Re: spam, John Stracke, 07:27
- Re: spam, J. Noel Chiappa, 07:17
- What the IETF should do: Amend RFC 2822 (was: Re: spam), Doug Sauder, 07:17
- RE: spam, Sabharwal, Atul, 07:17
- Re: spam - The IETF list is spam!, Anthony Atkielski, 01:49
- Re: spam - The IETF list is spam!, Tim Chown, 01:18
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 01:12
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 01:12
May 27, 2003
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 23:28
- RE: spam, shogunx, 22:18
- Re: spam, shogunx, 22:03
- Re: requiring payment (was spam), S Woodside, 22:02
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 21:47
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Jim Bauer, 21:42
- RE: A modest proposal (was: Re: spam), Michel Py, 21:39
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 21:26
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 21:14
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 20:53
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 20:43
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 20:34
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 20:30
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 20:30
- A modest proposal (was: Re: spam), Peter Deutsch, 20:06
- Re: spam, shogunx, 19:56
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 19:42
- Re: spam, David Morris, 19:42
- Re: spam, Peter Deutsch, 19:24
- The utility of IP, port blocking, Dan Kolis, 19:18
- What the IETF should do: Amend RFC 2822 (was: Re: spam), Doug Sauder, 19:18
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 19:18
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John C Klensin, 19:18
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 19:10
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Eric A. Hall, 18:40
- Re: spam, J. Noel Chiappa, 18:40
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 18:33
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 18:33
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 18:33
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, shogunx, 18:18
- RE: spam, Bob Hinden, 18:10
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 18:08
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 18:03
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 18:03
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 17:43
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Dean Anderson, 17:35
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 17:22
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Keith Moore, 17:21
- Re: spam, Eric Rescorla, 17:17
- Re: spam, Vernon Schryver, 17:15
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 17:03
- RE: spam, John C Klensin, 17:03
- Re: spam, David Morris, 16:56
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 16:47
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John C Klensin, 16:47
- contact, noc, 16:47
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 16:14
- RE: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Michel Py, 16:08
- Re: spam, Peter Deutsch, 16:05
- RE: spam, Tony Hain, 16:05
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Anthony Atkielski, 15:54
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, John C Klensin, 15:54
- Re: The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, shogunx, 15:43
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 15:40
- RE: spam, Fam. van den Berg, 15:37
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 15:22
- Re: spam, Scott Francis, 15:22
- The utilitiy of IP is at stake here, Tony Hain, 15:13
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 15:11
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 15:11
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 15:05
- RE: please move the spam discussion elsewhere, Michel Py, 14:35
- SMS, New media, old media, Dan Kolis, 14:34
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 14:13
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 14:05
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 13:53
- Re: please move the spam discussion elsewhere, Bryan Linder, 13:47
- Re: please move the spam discussion elsewhere, Peter Deutsch, 13:47
- Re: please move the spam discussion elsewhere, Anthony Atkielski, 13:41
- RE: spam, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 13:33
- Re: spam, Russ Allbery, 13:33
- Re: please move the spam discussion elsewhere, grenville armitage, 13:21
- RE: spam, Christian Huitema, 13:11
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 13:01
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 13:01
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 12:44
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 12:28
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 12:27
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 12:20
- Re: spam, John Stracke, 12:20
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 12:20
- Re: please move the spam discussion elsewhere, Anthony Atkielski, 12:01
- Re: spam, J. Noel Chiappa, 11:42
- Re: spam, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 11:39
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 11:33
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 11:29
- Re: Re: spam (fwd), Dean Anderson, 11:28
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 11:24
- please move the spam discussion elsewhere, Keith Moore, 11:07
- Re: spam, Zefram, 10:59
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 10:47
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 10:45
- Re: Simple Internet Protocol, Again, Iljitsch van Beijnum, 10:45
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Anthony Atkielski, 10:33
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Dean Anderson, 10:28
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Dean Anderson, 10:08
- Re: spam, Dave Aronson, 09:11
- major ISP spam count, Dave Aronson, 09:11
- tarpit, Dave Aronson, 08:51
- Re: spam, Russ Allbery, 08:34
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 08:17
- Re: spam, vinton g. cerf, 08:01
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Peter Deutsch, 08:00
- spam and the IETF, Andrew Newton, 07:47
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Bob Natale, 07:03
- IETF-related attendees at FTC spam forum, Dave Aronson, 06:57
- Spam and Variant threads, Spencer Dawkins, 04:26
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 04:04
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Anthony Atkielski, 01:59
- RE: spam, Christian de Larrinaga, 01:59
- Re: spam, Andrew Shore, 01:51
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Glenn Chisholm, 01:22
- Re: spam and Fax, Anthony Atkielski, 00:58
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:53
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:48
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:45
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:45
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:40
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Anthony Atkielski, 00:38
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Anthony Atkielski, 00:25
- Re: spam, Dominic Pinto, 00:20
- RE: spam and Fax, Avi Lior, 00:16
- RE: spam, Avi Lior, 00:00
- RE: spam, Avi Lior, 00:00
May 26, 2003
- RE: spam, Rod . Walsh, 23:42
- RE: spam, Avi Lior, 23:30
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 23:24
- Re: spam, John Loughney, 22:56
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Peter Deutsch, 22:48
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 21:44
- Re: spam, shogunx, 21:31
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Donald Eastlake 3rd, 21:22
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 20:49
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Valdis . Kletnieks, 19:57
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Peter Deutsch, 19:06
- Re: Simple Internet Protocol, Again, Masataka Ohta, 18:56
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Dean Anderson, 18:34
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 18:34
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 18:20
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 18:20
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 18:15
- RE: Simple Internet Protocol, Again, Soohong Daniel Park, 18:15
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 18:10
- Re: spam, S Woodside, 18:03
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 17:55
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 17:52
- Re: spam, shogunx, 17:52
- Re: spam, S Woodside, 17:46
- Re: spam, Dominic Pinto, 17:46
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 17:38
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 17:38
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 17:32
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Anthony Atkielski, 17:31
- Re: spam, Dave Crocker, 17:24
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 17:24
- Re: spam, Ole J. Jacobsen, 17:19
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 17:10
- Re[3]: spam, Dean Anderson, 16:58
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 16:58
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 16:52
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Dean Anderson, 16:52
- Re: spam, J. Noel Chiappa, 16:46
- Re: spam, Bill Sommerfeld, 16:40
- Re: spam, J. Noel Chiappa, 16:39
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 16:38
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 16:36
- RE: spam, Dean Anderson, 16:36
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 16:10
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 16:10
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 16:08
- Re: spam, Theodore Ts'o, 16:00
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 15:54
- Re[2]: spam, Richard Shockey, 15:46
- Re[3]: spam, Richard Welty, 15:45
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 15:44
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 15:40
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 15:33
- Re[2]: spam, Dean Anderson, 15:33
- Re: spam, Richard Shockey, 15:29
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Anthony Atkielski, 15:29
- Re: spam, Rick Wesson, 15:20
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 15:16
- Re: spam, Bill Sommerfeld, 15:13
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 15:08
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 15:07
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 14:58
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 14:41
- Re: spam, S Woodside, 14:35
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 14:35
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 14:29
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 14:22
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 14:21
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 14:18
- Re: spam, Andrew Shore, 14:14
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 14:10
- Re: spam, Tim Chown, 14:10
- Re[2]: spam, Richard Welty, 13:55
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 13:47
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 13:42
- Re: spam, Randy Bush, 13:42
- Re: spam, Eric Rescorla, 13:25
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 13:11
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 13:05
- Re: spam, Markku Savela, 13:03
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 12:50
- Re: spam, Bob Braden, 12:48
- Re: spam, Bill Manning, 12:47
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 12:46
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 12:30
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 12:21
- Re: spam, J. Noel Chiappa, 12:21
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 12:10
- Re: spam, Bill Manning, 11:55
- Re: spam, shogunx, 11:43
- Re: spam, S Woodside, 11:37
- Re: spam (fwd) (edit error on previous), Dean Anderson, 11:32
- Re: spam, Dean Anderson, 11:00
- Re: Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, Vernon Schryver, 10:55
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 10:50
- Re: Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, Eric A. Hall, 10:40
- Re: Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, Valdis . Kletnieks, 10:33
- Re: spam, Peter Deutsch, 09:35
- Re: Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, Eric A. Hall, 09:30
- Re: spam, Valdis . Kletnieks, 09:22
- Re: Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, Valdis . Kletnieks, 09:14
- Simple Internet Protocol, Again, Masataka Ohta, 08:04
- Re: Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, shogunx, 06:55
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Andrew G. Malis, 06:50
- Re: Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, Bill Sommerfeld, 06:44
- RE: spam, Christian de Larrinaga, 00:33
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 00:13
May 25, 2003
- Joint legal/technical anti-spam effort, Eric A. Hall, 23:11
- Re: spam, S Woodside, 19:46
- Re: spam, S Woodside, 19:39
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 19:00
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Michael Thomas, 18:17
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Peter Deutsch, 16:37
- RE: spam, Richard Shockey, 16:29
- Re: spam, Rick Wesson, 16:02
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker, 15:42
- RE: spam, Tomson Eric \(Yahoo.fr\), 15:02
- Re: spam, Richard Shockey, 14:57
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 13:58
- Re: spam, Bill Cunningham, 13:41
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 13:36
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 13:20
- Re: spam, Richard Shockey, 12:53
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Zefram, 12:15
- RE: spam, Michel Py, 11:27
- Congratulations, anthony, 11:01
- RE: spam, Donald Eastlake 3rd, 10:36
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Stephen Sprunk, 08:57
- RE: spam, Peter Ford, 08:47
- Re: spam, Eric A. Hall, 08:08
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Tim Chown, 05:12
- Re: spam, Anthony Atkielski, 04:32
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Tim Chown, 04:27
May 24, 2003
- Re: spam, Paul Vixie, 19:00
- spam, Bill Cunningham, 17:52
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 14:04
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker, 11:59
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 07:06
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, J. Noel Chiappa, 06:20
May 23, 2003
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 22:21
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker, 22:17
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 21:08
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker, 20:34
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 19:52
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Randy Bush, 19:45
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Donald Eastlake 3rd, 19:27
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 19:03
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Donald Eastlake 3rd, 18:34
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 16:16
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Valdis . Kletnieks, 16:11
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, grenville armitage, 15:29
- Re: Last Call: IP over MIME to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore, 14:35
May 06, 2003
- Minutes from IESG meetings, C. M. Heard, 14:05
- Re: Submitting an IETF draft in a specific WG, Donald Eastlake 3rd, 06:55
- Re: Submitting an IETF draft in a specific WG, John Stracke, 06:27
- RE: Submitting an IETF draft in a specific WG, Lars-Erik Jonsson (EAB), 06:26
- Submitting an IETF draft in a specific WG, Tulip Rasputin, 04:40
May 05, 2003
- A very nice game, internet-drafts, 18:18
- Re: Barry Leiner, shogunx, 08:58
- Re: The end of the world as we know it (was IPv6 address space shortages), Iljitsch van Beijnum, 07:13
- RE: My point about the ambiguity of the question, Bound, Jim, 06:42
- The end of the world as we know it (was IPv6 address space shortages), Pedro Roque Marques, 06:02
- Re: Barry Leiner, vinton g. cerf, 06:00
May 02, 2003
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, John C Klensin, 15:27
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 14:57
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 14:21
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Matt Crawford, 14:09
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Valdis . Kletnieks, 13:33
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Keith Moore, 13:27
- Re: My point about the ambiguity of the question, Keith Moore, 13:19
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 13:05
- RE: My point about the ambiguity of the question, Tony Hain, 12:55
- Re: My point about the ambiguity of the question, Keith Moore, 12:24
- RE: My point about the ambiguity of the question, Tony Hain, 12:17
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Keith Moore, 12:17
- Barry Leiner, Bob Hinden, 11:24
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Keith Moore, 10:59
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 10:41
- Re: My point about the ambiguity of the question, Keith Moore, 09:24
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, John C Klensin, 06:32
May 01, 2003
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, james woodyatt, 23:44
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, james woodyatt, 22:56
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Theodore Ts'o, 19:56
- My point about the ambiguity of the question, Tony Hain, 15:52
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, Keith Moore, 15:27
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, Peter Deutsch, 15:21
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Keith Moore, 15:17
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 15:13
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, J. Noel Chiappa, 14:56
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Stephen Sprunk, 14:47
- Re: site-local != NAT, Stephen Sprunk, 14:46
- Re: site-local != NAT, Keith Moore, 14:46
- Re[2]: My thoughts on local-use addresses, Richard Welty, 14:41
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 14:31
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Valdis . Kletnieks, 14:31
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Keith Moore, 14:31
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, John C Klensin, 14:30
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Theodore Ts'o, 13:18
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Valdis . Kletnieks, 13:18
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, J. Noel Chiappa, 13:18
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, james woodyatt, 13:18
- Re: site-local != NAT, Valdis . Kletnieks, 13:18
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, Keith Moore, 12:28
- Re: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Keith Moore, 11:59
- Re: site-local != NAT, Keith Moore, 11:38
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 11:22
- RE: site-local != NAT, Tony Hain, 11:17
- RE: what the "scope" disagreement is about, Tony Hain, 11:16
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, J. Noel Chiappa, 06:07
- Re: site-local != NAT, Charlie Perkins, 04:49
- Re: My thoughts on local-use addresses, Spencer Dawkins, 00:53