SPF Discuss (date)
March 31, 2004
- Re: sendmail-milter question, wayne, 21:30
- Re: "SPF for Dummies" asked, Meng Weng Wong, 15:51
- RE: Just how many of the boxen really *need* to be in the spf rr, Kelson Vibber, 12:49
- RE: Just how many of the boxen really *need* to be in the spf rr, Seth Goodman, 11:41
- Re: Just how many of the boxen really *need* to be in the spf rr, Kelson Vibber, 10:46
- Re: Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Shevek, 02:52
- Re: Spf Problem with DRAC?, Paul Howarth, 02:19
- RE: Just how many of the boxen really *need* to be in the spf rr, Lyndon Eaton, 01:51
March 30, 2004
- Re: Spf Problem with DRAC?, Mark, 21:38
- Just how many of the boxen really *need* to be in the spf rr, James H. Cloos Jr., 18:53
- proposed adoption and rollout schedule, Meng Weng Wong, 17:39
- adoption schedule, Meng Weng Wong, 15:39
- Re: ?all, David Woodhouse, 14:09
- Re: ?all, csm, 13:53
- Re: ?all, Stuart D. Gathman, 13:35
- Re: ?all, Jeremy T. Bouse, 13:17
- Re: ?all, wayne, 13:07
- Re: Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Alain Knaff, 12:56
- Re: ?all (was RE: aol.com), csm, 12:40
- Re: Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Stuart D. Gathman, 12:31
- Re: ?all (was RE: aol.com), Kelson Vibber, 12:30
- Re: Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Dan Boresjo, 12:19
- ?all (was RE: aol.com), Kelson Vibber, 12:16
- Re: Spf Problem with DRAC?, Kelson Vibber, 12:05
- Re: Spf Problem with DRAC?, Joshue, 11:53
- RE: aol.com, csm, 11:52
- Re: Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Stuart D. Gathman, 11:39
- Re: Spf Problem with DRAC?, Paul Howarth, 11:37
- Spf Problem with DRAC?, Joshue, 11:28
- Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Carsten Kuckuk, 11:14
- RE: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10:46
- Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, wayne, 09:18
- RE: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:03
- Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, wayne, 07:55
- Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Shevek, 07:37
- Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, wayne, 07:12
- RE: listbox using SRS?, Stuart D. Gathman, 06:49
- Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott (url), Boycott Email Caller ID, 06:28
- Re: aol.com, Mark Jeftovic, 06:16
- Re: aol.com, Mark Jeftovic, 05:39
- Re: Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Dan Boresjo, 04:39
- RE: listbox using SRS?, Lyndon Eaton, 04:23
- Re: aol.com, Meng Weng Wong, 04:22
- RE: aol.com, Lyndon Eaton, 04:17
- RE: Macro not working, Lyndon Eaton, 04:16
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Woodhouse, 03:05
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Nick Phillips, 02:37
March 29, 2004
- Re: aol.com, Graham Murray, 23:02
- aol.com, Chuck Mead, 22:22
- Discussion of Email Caller ID Boycott, Boycott Email Caller ID, 21:59
- Re: questions about postfix implementation, Chuck Mead, 20:30
- Re: unknown, Nico Kadel-Garcia, 19:22
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Nico Kadel-Garcia, 19:15
- Re: questions about postfix implementation, Meng Weng Wong, 18:59
- Re: questions about postfix implementation, Chuck Mead, 18:51
- RE: Macro not working, Stuart D. Gathman, 09:57
- Re: Macro not working, Meng Weng Wong, 09:15
- Re: Macro not working, Paul Howarth, 09:15
- RE: Macro not working, Lyndon Eaton, 09:08
- Re: questions about postfix implementation, csm, 08:21
- Re: questions about postfix implementation, Meng Weng Wong, 07:40
- Re: SRS: encoding with lengths instead of delimiters, Shevek, 06:50
- Re: SRS: encoding with lengths instead of delimiters, Theo Schlossnagle, 06:23
- Re: questions about postfix implementation, lst_hoe01, 04:09
- Re: SRS: encoding with lengths instead of delimiters, Shevek, 01:42
- Weekly SPF discussion mailinglist stats for 03/29/04, Wayne Schlitt, 00:23
March 28, 2004
- Error looking up SPF record, Roger Moser, 23:18
- Re: Error looking up SPF record, Greg Connor, 22:56
- Re: SRS: encoding with lengths instead of delimiters, wayne, 22:29
- SRS: encoding with lengths instead of delimiters, alan reider, 20:40
- questions about postfix implementation, Chuck Mead, 19:09
- Re: IPv6 in SPF (was: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3), Aredridel, 18:10
- Re: unknown, wayne, 13:08
- Re: unknown, Meng Weng Wong, 13:07
- Re: unknown, Greg Hewgill, 12:47
- RE : unknown, Bourque Daniel, 12:40
- Re: unknown, wayne, 12:32
- Re: IPv6 in SPF (was: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3), David Woodhouse, 10:21
- IPv6 in SPF (was: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3), Roger Moser, 09:31
- Re: IPv6 in SPF (was: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3), wayne, 09:16
- Re: IPv6 in SPF (was: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3), wayne, 08:34
- Re: IPv6 in SPF (was: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3), David Woodhouse, 08:07
- IPv6 in SPF (was: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3), wayne, 07:17
- Re: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3, Theo Schlossnagle, 06:34
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Woodhouse, 03:19
- Re: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3, Jasmin Buchert, 00:55
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Nick Phillips, 00:41
March 27, 2004
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Theo Schlossnagle, 08:00
- Re: ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3, wayne, 07:50
- Benchmarks ov M:S:Q vs libspf vs libspf-alt, wayne, 07:49
- TM domain adding SPF records, Paul Howarth, 05:21
- Re: ANNOUNCE sendmail-milter-spf version 1.40, Mark, 03:51
- Re: ANNOUNCE sendmail-milter-spf version 1.40, David Woodhouse, 03:46
- ANNOUNCE sendmail-milter-spf version 1.40, Mark, 03:43
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 03:29
March 26, 2004
- ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.3, wayne, 23:48
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Theo Schlossnagle, 15:24
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 15:18
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Stuart D. Gathman, 15:11
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Theo Schlossnagle, 15:10
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 15:02
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 15:00
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Stuart D. Gathman, 14:56
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Meng Weng Wong, 14:55
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 14:40
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 14:18
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Theo Schlossnagle, 13:48
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 12:47
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Theo Schlossnagle, 12:34
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 12:28
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Meng Weng Wong, 12:20
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 12:02
- Re: SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., Lou Katz, 11:38
- SPF and SMTP 551/251 result codes., David Woodhouse, 10:48
March 25, 2004
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Dan Boresjo, 17:13
- RE: AOL Spam down 27%, Seth Goodman, 15:56
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Tim Meadowcroft, 15:49
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Graham Murray, 15:37
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, wayne, 15:31
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Woodhouse, 15:27
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Woodhouse, 15:23
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Graham Murray, 15:19
- RE: AOL Spam down 27%, Marc Alaia, 15:13
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Brodbeck, 15:08
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Stuart D. Gathman, 15:00
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Tim Meadowcroft, 15:00
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Bourque Daniel, 14:52
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, wayne, 14:51
- RE: AOL Spam down 27%, Seth Goodman, 14:34
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Greg Connor, 14:32
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 14:22
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Mark, 14:21
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Roy Badami, 11:37
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Woodhouse, 10:27
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Brodbeck, 10:11
- German Anti-Spam-Task-Force meeting, Ernesto Baschny, 09:55
- New SPF test system available, wayne, 09:30
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, David Woodhouse, 08:45
- What to return if a DNS lookup fails?, Roger Moser, 08:31
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, wayne, 08:28
- Re: XML Schema for SPF records, David Woodhouse, 07:41
- Re: XML Schema for SPF records, Dan Boresjo, 07:24
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Brian Candler, 06:59
- Re: XML Schema for SPF records, wayne, 06:53
- Re: What to return if a DNS lookup fails?, wayne, 06:37
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Paul Howarth, 06:33
- What to return if a DNS lookup fails?, Roger Moser, 06:28
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Graham Murray, 04:08
- XML Schema for SPF records, James Pullicino, 03:47
- Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, Roger Moser, 00:26
March 24, 2004
- Re: SPF delegation, Stuart D. Gathman, 22:49
- I'm back, James Couzens, 21:50
- Re: SPF delegation, James Couzens, 21:47
- Re: SPF delegation, wayne, 21:28
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Mark, 21:06
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Stuart D. Gathman, 20:58
- SPF delegation, Stuart D. Gathman, 20:53
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Stuart D. Gathman, 20:47
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Meng Weng Wong, 19:11
- Re: sendmail-milter question, Meng Weng Wong, 19:05
- sendmail-milter question, Roy Badami, 19:01
- Re: Digest 1.227 for spf-discuss, administrator, 17:09
- RE: AOL Spam down 27%, Marc Alaia, 16:53
- Re: Digest 1.227 for spf-discuss, administrator, 16:23
- Re: Be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others, Tim Meadowcroft, 14:03
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Tim Meadowcroft, 12:48
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 11:05
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Daniel Roethlisberger, 09:47
- Re: AOL Spam down 27%, Guillaume Filion, 09:15
- Re: Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, David Brodbeck, 08:37
- Re: Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, John A. Martin, 08:06
- AOL Spam down 27%, Bradley Cloete, 07:44
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 05:50
- Re: Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, william(at)elan.net, 05:22
- Re: Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, Greg Connor, 00:38
March 23, 2004
- Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, wayne, 22:32
- Re: Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, Bob Poortinga, 22:27
- Be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others, wayne, 21:46
- Re: Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, Ask Bjørn Hansen, 21:27
- Re: Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, Meng Weng Wong, 20:31
- Extending SPF to IN-ADDR.ARPA space, Bob Poortinga, 18:55
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Tim Meadowcroft, 16:32
- new macro letter %{c}, Roger Moser, 14:34
- When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Roger Moser, 14:34
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Shevek, 12:58
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Alain Knaff, 12:13
- People who go out of their way to trigger email bugs, wayne, 11:05
- Please move SRS disucssions to SRS-discuss (Was: SRS and secondary MX), wayne, 10:44
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, wayne, 10:41
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Mark, 10:29
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 10:21
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, David Woodhouse, 10:06
- new macro letter %{c}, Meng Weng Wong, 09:50
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Alain Knaff, 09:41
- RE: SRS and secondary MX, Graham Wager, 09:29
- Re: SV: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, wayne, 09:26
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, wayne, 09:14
- Re: Another macro letter required besides 'i', wayne, 08:44
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, wayne, 08:35
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, wayne, 08:25
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, David Woodhouse, 08:24
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, wayne, 08:19
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Alain Knaff, 08:01
- Re: SRS and AOL case folding, Stuart D. Gathman, 07:36
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Alain Knaff, 07:33
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Stuart D. Gathman, 07:30
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, David Woodhouse, 07:04
- When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Roger Moser, 06:52
- Introduction of Roger, Roger Moser, 06:52
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, David Woodhouse, 06:30
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Shevek, 06:07
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, David Woodhouse, 05:07
- Re: 'exp' directive in included SPF record, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 04:51
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Shevek, 04:43
- Re: SRS and AOL case folding, Shevek, 04:39
- Re: turning on VERP for spf-discuss, David Woodhouse, 03:53
- Re: turning on VERP for spf-discuss, Meng Weng Wong, 02:43
- Another macro letter required besides 'i', Roger Moser, 01:51
- When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Roger Moser, 01:51
- When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Roger Moser, 01:51
- 'exp' directive in included SPF record, Roger Moser, 01:51
- Re: turning on VERP for spf-discuss, David Woodhouse, 01:50
- Re: the .tm registry announces SPF support, James Couzens, 01:16
- Re: Another macro letter required besides 'i', Greg Connor, 01:05
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Greg Connor, 00:57
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Greg Connor, 00:44
March 22, 2004
- SV: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, spf-team, 21:22
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Meng Weng Wong, 19:06
- turning on VERP for spf-discuss, Meng Weng Wong, 19:04
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, wayne, 18:55
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Meng Weng Wong, 18:49
- Re: 'exp' directive in included SPF record, Meng Weng Wong, 18:42
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Meng Weng Wong, 18:41
- Re: When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, wayne, 18:41
- the .tm registry announces SPF support, Meng Weng Wong, 17:44
- Re: Another macro letter required besides 'i', wayne, 17:12
- Another macro letter required besides 'i', Roger Moser, 17:05
- Re: Another macro letter required besides 'i', wayne, 16:10
- Another macro letter required besides 'i', Roger Moser, 15:57
- When should the proccessing of the SPF record end?, Ramakanta (das) HKS (PAMHO.NET SysOp) (Zurich - CH), 14:39
- 'exp' directive in included SPF record, Ramakanta (das) HKS (PAMHO.NET SysOp) (Zurich - CH), 14:39
- Re: Another macro letter required besides 'i', wayne, 14:23
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, wayne, 14:10
- Another macro letter required besides 'i', Roger Moser, 08:04
- Re: Odd behavior from sendmail-milter-spf-1.30, list+spf-discuss, 00:30
- Weekly SPF discussion mailinglist stats for 03/22/04, Wayne Schlitt, 00:23
March 21, 2004
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Greg Connor, 23:54
- Comments on spf-draft-20040209.txt, Neil Brown, 22:10
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Neil Brown, 20:03
- Re: Odd behavior from sendmail-milter-spf-1.30, Mark, 14:17
- Odd behavior from sendmail-milter-spf-1.30, Jeremy T. Bouse, 12:11
- RE: Odd Behavior since 1.996, Lyndon Eaton, 11:46
- RE: Re: SPF Guess, list+spf-discuss, 02:49
March 20, 2004
- RE: Re: SPF Guess, Marc Alaia, 14:27
- RE: Re: SPF Guess, list+spf-discuss, 12:58
- Re: case folding and brute force attack!, wayne, 12:56
- RE: Re: SPF Guess, marc, 12:31
- Re: another problem with crypto, David Woodhouse, 12:17
- Re: another problem with crypto, list+spf-discuss, 11:15
- RE: Re: SPF Guess, list+spf-discuss, 11:12
- Re: case folding and brute force attack!, Stuart D. Gathman, 11:00
- Re: Source IP spoofing--why unlikely?, Stuart D. Gathman, 10:09
- Source IP spoofing--why unlikely?, George Herson, 09:04
- Re: [spf-discuss] case folding and brute force attack!, David Woodhouse, 07:56
- Re: Re: spf-milter blocking emails to sourceforge, Mark, 07:35
- Re: case folding and brute force attack!, Alain Knaff, 07:03
- Re: spf-milter blocking emails to sourceforge, Za'mbori, Zolta'n, 04:51
- Re: spf-milter blocking emails to sourceforge, Za'mbori, Zolta'n, 04:41
- Re: spf-milter blocking emails to sourceforge, Graham Murray, 03:38
- spf-milter blocking emails to sourceforge, Graham Murray, 03:31
March 19, 2004
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Meng Weng Wong, 18:27
- Re: The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 18:20
- Re: case folding and brute force attack!, Meng Weng Wong, 17:35
- The demon problem, ancestor matching, and match_subdomains=yes, Meng Weng Wong, 17:32
- Re: case folding and brute force attack!, Stuart D. Gathman, 17:30
- Re: Odd Behavior since 1.996, Meng Weng Wong, 17:00
- Re: another problem with crypto, Greg Wooledge, 16:22
- Re: SRS and AOL case folding, David Woodhouse, 16:17
- RE: Official default SPF record, Stuart D. Gathman, 15:53
- Re: SRS and AOL case folding, Stuart D. Gathman, 15:51
- RE: Official default SPF record, Stuart D. Gathman, 15:43
- Re: SRS and AOL case folding, David Woodhouse, 15:43
- SRS and AOL case folding, Stuart D. Gathman, 15:24
- RE: Official default SPF record, Marc Alaia, 14:51
- Re: Odd Behavior since 1.996, Jeremy T. Bouse, 14:49
- Official default SPF record, Stuart D. Gathman, 14:45
- Re: The IETF working group that will discuss SPF was approved, wayne, 14:20
- Re: Odd Behavior since 1.996, wayne, 13:58
- RE: Odd Behavior since 1.996, Marc Alaia, 13:51
- Re: This company will be glad of SPF, John Capo, 13:43
- RE: Re: SPF Guess, Marc Alaia, 13:43
- Re: Odd Behavior since 1.996, Jeremy T. Bouse, 13:39
- Re: Odd Behavior since 1.996, wayne, 13:03
- Odd Behavior since 1.996, Marc Alaia, 11:48
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, Kelson Vibber, 10:36
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, David Woodhouse, 10:25
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, Stuart D. Gathman, 10:23
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, Lyndon Eaton, 10:20
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, David Woodhouse, 10:10
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, Lyndon Eaton, 09:57
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, David Woodhouse, 09:48
- RE: This company will be glad of SPF, Lyndon Eaton, 09:33
- RE: Re: envelope from vs data from, Lyndon Eaton, 04:32
- RE: another problem with crypto, Lyndon Eaton, 04:22
- Re: another problem with crypto, David Woodhouse, 04:21
March 18, 2004
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Stuart D. Gathman, 22:06
- Re: another problem with crypto, Thomas H Jones II, 20:25
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Philip Gladstone, 20:07
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Greg Connor, 19:30
- Re: another problem with crypto, Meng Weng Wong, 19:16
- RE: another problem with crypto, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 19:11
- another problem with crypto, Meng Weng Wong, 19:06
- Re: Re: envelope from vs data from, Nico Kadel-Garcia, 16:52
- Re: The IETF working group that will discuss SPF was approved, Jeremy T. Bouse, 16:41
- Re: SRS and secondary MX, Mark, 16:39
- The IETF working group that will discuss SPF was approved, wayne, 16:23
- Spoofed Return-Path FWIW, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 15:14
- SRS and secondary MX, Stuart D. Gathman, 13:57
- Re: SRS with sendmail and Python, David Woodhouse, 08:51
- Re: SRS with sendmail and Python, Stuart D. Gathman, 08:47
- Re: ZDnet UK story on SPF, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 08:43
- Re: SRS with sendmail and Python, David Woodhouse, 08:42
- ZDnet UK story on SPF, mengwong, 08:09
- Re: 500 errors, civil disobedience, and encouraging wide SPF adoption, Dan Boresjo, 06:37
March 17, 2004
- 500 errors, civil disobedience, and encouraging wide SPF adoption, Neil Brown, 22:43
- SRS with sendmail and Python, Stuart D. Gathman, 21:27
- Re: FAQ updates needed, wayne, 18:24
- FAQ updates needed, Neil Brown, 15:56
- Re: Re: envelope from vs data from, Jeremy T. Bouse, 15:14
- RE: Re: envelope from vs data from, Lyndon Eaton, 13:45
- Re: envelope from vs data from, Jim Ramsay, 12:50
- Re: Re: envelope from vs data from, Lou Katz, 12:05
- RE: Re: envelope from vs data from, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11:50
- Re: Re: envelope from vs data from, wayne, 11:14
- Re: Re: envelope from vs data from, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 10:59
- RE: Re: envelope from vs data from, Lyndon Eaton, 10:33
- RE: Re: envelope from vs data from, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09:39
- RE: Re: envelope from vs data from, Marc Alaia, 09:17
- Re: Re: envelope from vs data from, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 09:09
- Re: distinction between envelope "MAIL FROM" and header "from:", Meng Weng Wong, 07:49
- Re: envelope from vs data from, Meng Weng Wong, 07:32
- Re: distinction between envelope "MAIL FROM" and header "from:", Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 04:14
- Re: distinction between envelope "MAIL FROM" and header "from:", David Woodhouse, 00:31
March 16, 2004
- Re: distinction between envelope "MAIL FROM" and header "from:", Greg Connor, 23:45
- Re: Re: SPF Guess, marc, 21:52
- Re: distinction between envelope "MAIL FROM" and header "from:", John A. Martin, 21:28
- Re: SPF Guess, Meng Weng Wong, 20:00
- RE: SPF Guess, Marc Alaia, 19:46
- RE: SPF Guess, Marc Alaia, 19:41
- distinction between envelope "MAIL FROM" and header "from:", Meng Weng Wong, 19:34
- Re: SPF Guess, Meng Weng Wong, 19:30
- SPF Record Setup for Hosted Customers, Hector Santos, 18:47
- SPF Guess, Marc Alaia, 18:10
- Love it! Spammer behavior, Hector Santos, 17:29
- Python SRS, Stuart D. Gathman, 14:48
- Comparing SPF filtering results to blacklist results, Nico Kadel-Garcia, 13:39
- Re: Everyone Having an SPF Record Fails From This List, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 11:45
- Re: SPF plugin for postfix, lst_hoe01, 10:41
- Re: SPF featured at upcoming conferences, Theo Schlossnagle, 10:38
- Re: SPF plugin for postfix, Tony Finch, 10:35
- SPF plugin for postfix, Meng Weng Wong, 10:13
- Re: IETF news: BOF -> WG, MARID draft charter, lst_hoe01, 10:09
- SPF featured at upcoming conferences, Meng Weng Wong, 10:02
- Re: IETF news: BOF -> WG, MARID draft charter, Meng Weng Wong, 09:53
- IETF news: BOF -> WG, MARID draft charter, Meng Weng Wong, 09:51
- Re: Everyone Having an SPF Record Fails From This List, Greg Connor, 09:06
- Re: Everyone Having an SPF Record Fails From This List, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 07:35
- Re: Everyone Having an SPF Record Fails From This List, wayne, 07:22
- Re: Everyone Having an SPF Record Fails From This List, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 07:17
- Surprising level of efficiency of SPF today!, Alain Knaff, 06:58
- SPF DNS txt question, Jason Chen, 06:38
- Re: Everyone Having an SPF Record Fails From This List, Alain Knaff, 06:32
- Everyone Having an SPF Record Fails From This List, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 06:03
March 15, 2004
- Re: Explaination doc for error code reasoning?, Meng Weng Wong, 19:17
- Re: HELO Testing, Hector Santos, 18:40
- Re: HELO Testing, Hector Santos, 18:31
- RE: HELO Testing, Seth Goodman, 17:08
- RE: HELO Testing, Greg Connor, 16:39
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Rolf E. Sonneveld, 12:32
- RE: HELO Testing, Seth Goodman, 10:55
- Re: Explaination doc for error code reasoning?, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 10:41
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 10:28
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Brodbeck, 09:50
- Re: Explaination doc for error code reasoning?, wayne, 09:43
- Explaination doc for error code reasoning?, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 07:47
- Weekly SPF discussion mailinglist stats for 03/15/04, Wayne Schlitt, 00:23
March 13, 2004
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 21:24
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, list+spf-discuss, 15:41
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Rolf E. Sonneveld, 14:05
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, Daniel Roethlisberger, 12:13
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, list+spf-discuss, 11:52
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, John A. Martin, 11:30
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 10:45
- RE: HELO Testing, list+spf-discuss, 10:07
- Re: Calling spfquery or spfd, list+spf-discuss, 10:02
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, list+spf-discuss, 09:55
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, list+spf-discuss, 09:43
March 12, 2004
- Re: new dimensions in stopping spam, Greg Connor, 16:35
- RE: HELO Testing, Greg Connor, 16:28
- Re: new dimensions in stopping spam, David Brodbeck, 16:28
- Re: Calling spfquery or spfd, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 16:27
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, Jeremy T. Bouse, 16:25
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, David Woodhouse, 16:15
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, David Woodhouse, 16:12
- RE: HELO Testing, Marc Alaia, 15:48
- Re: HELO Testing, Hector Santos, 15:39
- RE: HELO Testing, Seth Goodman, 15:35
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, Hector Santos, 14:52
- Re: HELO Testing, Stuart D. Gathman, 14:39
- Re: HELO Testing, Greg Connor, 14:31
- Re: new dimensions in stopping spam, Greg Connor, 14:26
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, Greg Connor, 14:03
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, Jeremy T. Bouse, 13:38
- HELO Testing, Marc Alaia, 13:12
- Re: SPF Records Question, wayne, 12:04
- SPF Records Question, Kevin Peuhkurinen, 11:58
- Re: new dimensions in stopping spam, Dan Boresjo, 11:17
- Re: Calling spfquery or spfd, wayne, 10:19
- Re: new dimensions in stopping spam, wayne, 09:35
- Re: april linux journal, Randy Pearson, 08:18
- Re: april linux journal, Jameel Akari, 08:02
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 07:35
- Re: SRS and RCPT TO: question, David Woodhouse, 05:18
- Calling spfquery or spfd, Greg Cirino - Cirelle Enterprises, 05:12
- april linux journal, Meng Weng Wong, 04:46
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 03:17
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Greg Connor, 02:45
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 01:38
- SecurityFocus article, Matthew Barr, 01:27
March 11, 2004
- Re: [spf-discuss] SRS and RCPT TO: question, Mark, 23:27
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Greg Connor, 22:33
- SRS and RCPT TO: question, Jeremy T. Bouse, 22:27
- Re: accreditation modifier, Greg Connor, 22:09
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 18:42
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Rolf E. Sonneveld, 15:56
- Possible modification to Mail::SRS, Jeremy T. Bouse, 13:00
- RE: New to SPF, Lyndon Eaton, 11:14
- New to SPF, Lyndon Eaton, 10:45
- winnetmag.com is running a poll on SPF/DK/C-ID, wayne, 09:12
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 06:56
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 06:14
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 04:16
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 03:02
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 01:53
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 00:01
March 10, 2004
- SPF support in qpsmtpd, Ask Bjørn Hansen, 21:39
- Re: accreditation modifier, Meng Weng Wong, 20:02
- Re: accreditation modifier, Meng Weng Wong, 20:01
- Re: new dimensions in stopping spam, Meng Weng Wong, 19:41
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 18:34
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 18:27
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 18:16
- RE: accreditation modifier, Greg Connor, 18:08
- RE: accreditation modifier, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 16:17
- Re: accreditation modifier, Greg Connor, 16:06
- Re: new dimensions in stopping spam, Greg Connor, 16:00
- RE: accreditation modifier, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 15:08
- new dimensions in stopping spam, mengwong, 09:35
- Re: Wanted: ip6 mechanism definition, Jeremy T. Bouse, 07:31
- Re: accreditation modifier, Meng Weng Wong, 03:39
- accreditation modifier, Meng Weng Wong, 03:03
- Wanted: ip6 mechanism definition, Meng Weng Wong, 02:54
- Re: spfd socket map for sendmail, update re travel, Meng Weng Wong, 02:43
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Jon Kyme, 02:23
March 09, 2004
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 20:06
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 19:24
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 19:21
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 17:25
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 14:57
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 14:49
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 14:45
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Brodbeck, 14:39
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 13:57
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Dave Crocker, 13:27
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 11:27
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Greg Connor, 11:26
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Greg Hewgill, 11:17
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 11:07
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 10:42
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 10:39
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Hector Santos, 10:37
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David Woodhouse, 10:26
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 10:01
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Jon Kyme, 09:58
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Dave Crocker, 09:28
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Jon Kyme, 09:18
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Dave Crocker, 08:47
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Jon Kyme, 03:54
- Re: OT: DNS, MX Records and TTL, Greg Connor, 00:05
March 08, 2004
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Dave Crocker, 15:15
- Re: OT: DNS, MX Records and TTL, wayne, 10:34
- Re: OT: DNS, MX Records and TTL, Arnold K., 10:15
- Re: OT: DNS, MX Records and TTL, Greg Connor, 09:59
- Re: Digest 1.210 for spf-discuss, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 09:23
- Re: Digest 1.210 for spf-discuss, administrator, 08:17
- OT: DNS, MX Records and TTL, Marc Alaia, 07:48
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Jon Kyme, 02:53
- Weekly SPF discussion mailinglist stats for 03/08/04, Wayne Schlitt, 00:23
March 07, 2004
- Re: spfd socket map for sendmail, Paul Iadonisi, 23:46
- Re[2]: A HELO Question, Sanford Whiteman, 18:09
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Dave Crocker, 17:55
- RE: ip6 mechanism + signing messages, Jeroen Massar, 17:54
- Re: Digest 1.209 for spf-discuss, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 11:18
- ISP using -all, Nathan Wharton, 09:05
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 09:01
- Re: A HELO Question, Philip Gladstone, 08:45
- Re: Digest 1.209 for spf-discuss, administrator, 08:38
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Jon Kyme, 04:10
- Re: A HELO Question, Greg Connor, 00:36
March 06, 2004
- spfd socket map for sendmail, Meng Weng Wong, 21:49
- Re: A HELO Question, Theo Schlossnagle, 20:19
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 20:06
- Re: A HELO Question, Meng Weng Wong, 20:00
- Re[2]: A HELO Question, Sanford Whiteman, 19:55
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 19:54
- Re: A HELO Question, Meng Weng Wong, 19:49
- Re: A HELO Question, Meng Weng Wong, 19:46
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 19:26
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 19:19
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 19:16
- Re: A HELO Question, Hector Santos, 18:17
- Re: A HELO Question, Greg Connor, 17:23
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Greg Connor, 16:59
- Re: A HELO Question, Nathan Wharton, 16:55
- Re: Strictly my opinion, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 15:11
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David, 14:02
- Re: A HELO Question, Philip Gladstone, 12:38
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 12:22
- Re: Sendmail.com announces they are working on DomainKeys with Yahoo, Paul Iadonisi, 12:22
- Re: A HELO Question, Nathan Wharton, 12:14
- Re: A HELO Question, wayne, 11:47
- A HELO Question, Nathan Wharton, 11:31
- Re: Strictly my opinion, wayne, 10:57
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 10:50
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, wayne, 10:45
- Strictly my opinion, administrator, 10:42
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, David, 09:30
- Re: Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Dan Boresjo, 09:17
- Latest proposal re HELO checking: make HELO tests optional, Meng Weng Wong, 08:39
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 00:46
March 05, 2004
- RE: news from the Seoul BOF, Greg Connor, 15:22
- RE: news from the Seoul BOF, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 15:16
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, dimon, 09:17
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 08:59
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, Jasper Wallace, 07:19
- Re: problems with postfix, lst_hoe01, 00:46
March 04, 2004
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, Matthew Barr, 21:28
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 19:55
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, Guillaume Filion, 16:27
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, Kelson Vibber, 16:04
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, Kelson Vibber, 15:56
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, Guillaume Filion, 15:54
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 15:50
- RE : news from the Seoul BOF, Bourque Daniel, 15:50
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, dimon, 15:43
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 15:30
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 15:28
- Re: A note on the semantic of MX records, Fotis Georgatos, 14:21
- Re: problems with postfix, John A. Martin, 14:14
- RE: news from the Seoul BOF, Marc Alaia, 14:09
- Re: Re: problems with postfix, lst_hoe01, 14:00
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 13:53
- RE: news from the Seoul BOF, Jobe, Jim, 13:53
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, George Mitchell, 13:48
- Re: Re: problems with postfix, Mark Jeftovic, 13:44
- RE: news from the Seoul BOF, Marc Alaia, 13:11
- Re: Re: problems with postfix, Theo Van Dinter, 13:04
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 13:04
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, George Mitchell, 13:03
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 12:43
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, dimon, 12:41
- Re: problems with postfix, John A. Martin, 12:32
- RE: news from the Seoul BOF, Jobe, Jim, 12:26
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 12:21
- Re: problems with postfix, Theo Van Dinter, 12:02
- problems with postfix, Mark Jeftovic, 11:50
- RE: A note on the semantic of MX records, Marc Alaia, 10:01
- Re: A note on the semantic of MX records, Fotis Georgatos, 09:00
- RE: A note on the semantic of MX records, Marc Alaia, 08:04
- Re: news from the Seoul BOF, wayne, 08:02
- RE: solving the demon problem, Marc Alaia, 07:59
- news from the Seoul BOF, Meng Weng Wong, 07:16
- Re: A note on the semantic of MX records, Dan Boresjo, 07:08
- A note on the semantic of MX records, Fotis Georgatos, 05:01
March 03, 2004
- Re: solving the demon problem, Meng Weng Wong, 23:45
- Re: solving the demon problem, Meng Weng Wong, 23:45
- Re: solving the demon problem, wayne, 21:20
- Re: solving the demon problem, wayne, 21:11
- Re: solving the demon problem, Theo Schlossnagle, 21:00
- Re: solving the demon problem, Theo Schlossnagle, 20:57
- Re: solving the demon problem, Theo Schlossnagle, 20:53
- RE: solving the demon problem, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 20:52
- Re: SPF Server, wayne, 20:07
- Re: solving the demon problem, wayne, 19:36
- solving the demon problem, Meng Weng Wong, 18:57
- RE: SPF Server, David Brodbeck, 17:33
- Re: Notify about using the e-mail account., John Hughes, 15:49
- Re: SPF Server, wayne, 12:57
- Re: SPF Server, Andy Bakun, 12:42
- RE: SPF Server, Seth Goodman, 12:26
- RE: SPF Server, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 12:21
- Re: SPF Server, wayne, 11:11
- RE: SPF Server, Seth Goodman, 10:34
- Re: SV: ip6 mechanism + signing messages, Dustin D. Trammell, 09:03
- RE: SPF Server, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08:43
- RE: [spf-help] Disable helo checks in SPF-Policyd, Marc Alaia, 08:10
- Sender address forgery by e-mail viruses (was: RE: Word file), Julian Mehnle, 04:48
- Re: ANNOUNCE: Mail::SRS version 0.29, wayne, 04:46
- ANNOUNCE: Mail::SRS version 0.29, Shevek, 03:25
- Re: ip6 mechanism + signing messages, David Woodhouse, 01:45
- SV: ip6 mechanism + signing messages, Lars Dybdahl, 01:23
March 01, 2004
- ANNOUNCE libspf-alt version 0.2, wayne, 16:36
- Re: Possible SPF machine-domain loophole???, Dustin D. Trammell, 11:54
- Re: Signed Envelope Sender: SRS on steroids, Jim Ramsay, 07:47
- Re: Deployment dynamic: LMAP vs MTA registration schemes, David Woodhouse, 02:33
- Weekly SPF discussion mailinglist stats for 03/01/04, Wayne Schlitt, 00:23