First quarter 2007 Archives by thread
Starting: Mon Jan 1 22:19:27 PDT 2007
Ending: Fri Mar 30 15:11:04 PDT 2007
Messages: 589
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Jim Fenton
- Fwd: Re: [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Charles Lindsey
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] Base issue: multiple linked signatures
Charles Lindsey
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiple linked signatures
John Levine
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation, was Base issue: multiple
linked signatures
Wietse Venema
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation, was Base issue: multiple
linked signatures
Michael Thomas
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiplelinked signatures
Bill.Oxley at cox.com
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiplelinked signatures
Dave Crocker
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiplelinked signatures
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiplelinked signatures
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiplelinked signatures
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiplelinked signatures
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation, was Base issue:
multiplelinked signatures
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] basic question
david
- [ietf-dkim] basic question
Gino Cerullo
- [ietf-dkim] basic question
Dave Crocker
- [ietf-dkim] basic question
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] basic question
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] basic question
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] example.edu (was: basic question)
Frank Ellermann
- [ietf-dkim] example.edu (was: basic question)
RL 'Bob' Morgan
- [ietf-dkim] Re: example.edu
Frank Ellermann
- [ietf-dkim] Re: basic question
Frank Ellermann
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation, was Base issue: multiple
linked signatures
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation
Douglas Otis
- [ietf-dkim] mutant message validation,
was Base issue: multiplelinked signatures
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] canonicalized null body and dkim
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] canonicalized null body and dkim
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] Re: canonicalized null body and dkim
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] Meeting in Prague...
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: New SSP Requirement - Body Truncation Limits
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: New SSP Requirement - Body Truncation Limits
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: New SSP Requirement - Body Truncation Limits
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-08 submitted
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] New IANA considerations: standards track or just RFC?
Paul Hoffman
- [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-base-08.txt
Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
- Fwd: Re: [ietf-dkim] Change to Section 6
Charles Lindsey
- [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: tag l=2 and dealing with leading blank lines for
SIMPLE c14n.
Hector Santos
- [ietf-dkim] New IANA considerations: standards track or just RFC?
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-09 submitted
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] A concrete use case for policy
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-base-09.txt
Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
- [ietf-dkim] Milestone dates....
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] SSP restart
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] draft-ietf-dkim-base-10 submitted
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] Domain ignore list in sec 6.1.1 ?
John Levine
- [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-base-10.txt
Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
- [ietf-dkim] Protocol Action: 'DomainKeys Identified Mail (DKIM)
Signatures' to Proposed Standard
The IESG
- [ietf-dkim] Policy
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Jabber reminder - tomorrow at 1600 UTC
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Today's jabber notes...
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Prague agena slots...
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade and
Downgrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade and
Downgrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade
andDowngrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade
andDowngrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade and
Downgrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Non-Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade
andDowngrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll :
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- 1368 straw-poll : (was: Re: [ietf-dkim] Deployment Non-Scenario
7:Cryptographic Upgrade and Downgrade Attacks)
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade and
Downgrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll :
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll :
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll :
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1386 and downgrade attacks
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll :
Charles Lindsey
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Non-Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade and
Downgrade Attacks
Charles Lindsey
- [ietf-dkim] We are actually disagreeing on the point of policy Was
RE: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] We are actually disagreeing on the point of policy
Was RE: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] We are actually disagreeing on the point of policy
Was RE: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] We are actually disagreeing on the point of policy
Was RE: 1368 straw-poll
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1365: drop "never send mail"?
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1365: drop "never send mail"?
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1365: drop "never send mail"?
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Additional lookups (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll)
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade
andDowngrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Non-Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade and
Downgrade Attacks
Charles Lindsey
- [ietf-dkim] req 6.3.8 support?
Michael Thomas
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1365: drop "never send mail"?
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1365: drop "never send mail"?
Scott Kitterman
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1386 and downgrade attacks
Eric Allman
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic
Upgrade andDowngrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Additional lookups (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: 1368 straw-poll)
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Characteristics for describing an SSP proposal
Dave Crocker
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1386 and downgrade attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] so can we get to some decisions now...
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] 1365 yes/no
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Issue 1386 and downgrade attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] 1365 yes/no
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Deployment Scenario 7: Cryptographic Upgrade
andDowngrade Attacks
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] 1365 yes/no
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Proposed 1368 wording draft 1
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Comment on RE: [ietf-dkim] 1365 yes/no
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Unequal treatment RE: Additional lookups (was Re: [ietf-dkim] Re:
1368 straw-poll)
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] #1398
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Proposed 1368 wording draft 1
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] #1398
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Additional lookups
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Comment on RE: [ietf-dkim] 1365 yes/no
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Proposed 1368 wording draft 1
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] 1365 yes/no
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Comment on RE: [ietf-dkim] 1365 yes/no
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Unequal treatment RE: Additional lookups (was Re: [ietf-dkim]
Re: 1368 straw-poll)
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- Unequal treatment RE: Additional lookups (was Re: [ietf-dkim]
Re: 1368 straw-poll)
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Additional lookups
Hallam-Baker, Phillip
- [ietf-dkim] Administrivia...
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Agenda posted...
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] LWSP in base64-encoded public key TXT RR
Mark Martinec
- [ietf-dkim] Re: submission for draft-ietf-dkim-overview-04.txt
Dave Crocker
- [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-03.txt
Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
- [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-overview-04.txt
Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
- Fwd: [ietf-dkim] Re: I-D ACTION: draft-ietf-dkim-overview-04.txt
Douglas Otis
- Fwd: Re: [ietf-dkim] Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-overview-04.txt
Charles Lindsey
- [ietf-dkim] Production use of DKIM
Dave Crocker
- [ietf-dkim] Strawpoll on SSP requirement 5.3.10
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] DKIM WG summary for SAAG
Stephen Farrell
- [ietf-dkim] Re: Protocol Policy Publication
Frank Ellermann
- [ietf-dkim] Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-03
Jim Fenton
Last message date:
Fri Mar 30 15:11:04 PDT 2007
Archived on: Fri Mar 30 15:13:33 PDT 2007
This archive was generated by
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition).