Second quarter 2006 Archives by thread
Starting: Sat Apr 1 09:04:29 PDT 2006
Ending: Thu Jun 29 09:31:40 PDT 2006
Messages: 1028
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for
multiple signatures
Paul Hoffman
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics
formultiple signatures
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and semantics for
multiple signatures
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax and
semanticsformultiple signatures
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for specifying syntax
andsemanticsformultiple signatures
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Revised proposal for specifying syntax and semantics
for multiple signatures
Paul Hoffman
- [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal change to 3.6.1 t=y Description
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Dallas meeting minutes accepted.
DKIM Chair
- [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02.txt
Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
- [ietf-dkim] Alternative text for semantics of multiple signatures
SM
- [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 1.1 Terminology and Model - SMTP
!= POP
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] Issue with threats-02: 4.1.9. Body Length Limit Abuse -
MUA mitigation
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] New Issues: bunch of nits for base
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] jabber meeting announce - April 20th, 1600 (Dublin)
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Claim Responsibility
for email address use?
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Affects verification of
messages?
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Permitted and preferred
algorithms.
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Message replay impact
rating
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Packet Amplification
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Claim Responsibility
for email address use?
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//Affects verification of
messages?
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=
Paul Hoffman
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] proposal: retain x=
Michael Thomas
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-threats-02 nit//[various topics]
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM-BASE-00: Proposed Expiration Tag (x=) Description
Change
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: get rid of x=
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] multiple keys under same selector+domain?
Dave Crocker
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Straw poll on x=
Mark Delany
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] On-line Registration Closing Sunday
Robert Holliday
- [ietf-dkim] Proposed fingerprint tag description
Murray S. Kucherawy
- [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains
Jim Fenton
- [ietf-dkim] Meaning of x= and DKIM signatures in general
John L
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Mark Delany
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] authentication result headers are an unsafe
alternative
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] authentication result headers are an unsafe
alternative
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] authentication result headers are an unsafe
alternative
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Lyndon Nerenberg
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Lyndon Nerenberg
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Collecting SMTP delivery data.
Lyndon Nerenberg
- [ietf-dkim] Collecting SMTP delivery data.
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal, just a side
benifit
Michael Thomas
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the MUA should not be the goal,
just a side benifit
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-01 submitted
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: draft-ietf-dkim-base-01 submitted
Mircea Purdea
- [ietf-dkim] Improtant legal precedent
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Improtant legal precedent
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] New issue: Signing by parent domains
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Service model options for an ISP
Mark Delany
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: Section 6.2 Get the Public Key
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base-01: 6.2 - DNS error
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] x= lets senders expire responsibility
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-base-01.txt
Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
- [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: IETF Jabber server changes]
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Expiration Tag (x=) is required to minimize DNS lookups.
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal: Do the semantics first, then straw poll
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] 2.1 Signers // Within an administrative domain?
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] 2.1 Signers // Within an administrative domain?
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Clarifications on draft-ietf-dkim-base-01
Murray S. Kucherawy
- [ietf-dkim] Straw poll on x=
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Re: authentication result headers are an unsafe
alternative
Murray S. Kucherawy
- [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Attempted text for x=
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] Today's jabber.
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] jabber fun
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Jabber room problems
Barry Leiba
- [ietf-dkim] sysadmin says:
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Section 5.2 move recommendations for key retention to a
BCP
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] Expiry based upon Received Time rather than Current
time.
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] Notes from DKIM jabber meeting on 20 April 2006
DKIM Chair
- [ietf-dkim] Format for t=
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] x= date format and support logic
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] Next jabber slot May 4th
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag
Mircea Purdea
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag
Mircea Purdea
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal for v= tag
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] question on _domainkey prefix to DNS query (and record)
Amir Herzberg
- [ietf-dkim] Proposal to address Expiration Issue: Partial DKIM
Verificaton Support
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] "Best Before" vs. "expiration" date
Jim Fenton
- [ietf-dkim] t=y is ugly and critical tagsb
Amir Herzberg
- [ietf-dkim] Trust Annotation Support
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] Body Length mechanism rejections
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] Binary algorithms and algorithm spoofing during a
transition.
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] When i= domain != d= domain
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] Fw: I-D ACTION:draft-santos-dkim-rcvd-00.txt
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] dkim-base: _domainkey vs _dkim
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] z= question with X headers
Arvel Hathcock
- [ietf-dkim] r= for instilling good domain-name practices
Douglas Otis