[ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures

SM sm at resistor.net
Wed Apr 5 14:55:55 PDT 2006

Previous message: [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP
Next message: [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hello,
At 10:05 05-04-2006, Bill.Oxley at cox.com wrote:
>Yes, the case indicates importance, much like bold/italic or underline,
>not meaning

I believe http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2119.txt sums it.

Regards,
-sm

Previous message: [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP
Next message: [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP != POP
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

More information about the ietf-dkim mailing list