Third quarter 2007 Archives by author

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ date ]
• More info on this list...

Starting: Mon Jul 2 08:15:01 PDT 2007
Ending: Sun Sep 30 17:11:28 PDT 2007
Messages: 103

• [ietf-dkim] domain keys, the h tag, and the reflector at sendmail.net   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Step 9   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] Conflicts between -ssp-requirements and -ssp (was: Step 9)   Eric Allman
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] Choices about Practice vs. Publication   Steve Atkins
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Bill.Oxley at cox.com
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Choices about Practice vs. Publication   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt]   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt]   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Choices about Practice vs. Publication   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the local news   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the local news   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-05.txt   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM 1st Interoperability Event -- 24-25 Oct 2007, Dallas   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Survey: Reputation string, to use from DKIM   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Survey: Reputation string, to use from DKIM   Dave Crocker
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Thoughts on latest SSP draft   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] 2821bis and AAAA (was: Thoughts on latest SSP draft)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] TPA-SSP (was: DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?)   Frank Ellermann
• [ietf-dkim] Draft agenda for Chicago...   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt]   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] SSP draft suggestions   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] SSP draft suggestions   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] The (really) latest SSP draft   Stephen Farrell
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Review of draft-ietf-dkim-overview-05   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] SSP draft suggestions   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] The (really) latest SSP draft   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Step 9   Jim Fenton
• Step 2 (Re: [ietf-dkim] The (really) latest SSP draft)   Jim Fenton
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• [ietf-dkim] SSP draft suggestions   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] Thoughts on latest SSP draft   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] SSP draft suggestions   Arvel Hathcock
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-wallace-ta-mgmt-problem-statement-01.txt]   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Paul Hoffman
• [ietf-dkim] Document Action: 'Requirements for a DKIM Signing Practices Protocol' to Informational RFC   The IESG
• [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
• [ietf-dkim] I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-05.txt   Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-01.txt   Internet-Drafts at ietf.org
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Scott Kitterman
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: secdir review of draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-04]   Eliot Lear
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM in the local news   Barry Leiba
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] SSP draft suggestions   John Levine
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Charles Lindsey
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Charles Lindsey
• [ietf-dkim] Draft agenda for Chicago...   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Choices about Practice vs. Publication   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Choices about Practice vs. Publication   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-00.txt   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Choices about Practice vs. Publication   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Thoughts on latest SSP draft   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] SSP draft suggestions   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] user-based keys / another protocol   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Thoughts on latest SSP draft   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] Re: DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 2821bis and AAAA (was: Thoughts on latest SSP draft)   Douglas Otis
• [ietf-dkim] 2821bis and AAAA (was: Thoughts on latest SSP draft)   Douglas Otis
• Fwd: Re: [ietf-dkim] 2821bis and AAAA (was: Thoughts on latest SSP draft)   SM
• [ietf-dkim] user-based keys / another protocol   Florian Sager
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] [Fwd: secdir review of draft-ietf-dkim-ssp-requirements-04]   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] Conflicts between -ssp-requirements and -ssp   Hector Santos
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] DKIM signature can mean it's safe to generate bounce?   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Choices about Practice vs. Publication   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: dkim-overview -- normative statements   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Step 9 (was: The (really) latest SSP draft)   Michael Thomas
• Step 2 (Re: [ietf-dkim] The (really) latest SSP draft)   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Step 9   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Re: Step 9   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] Conflicts between -ssp-requirements and -ssp   Michael Thomas
• [ietf-dkim] domain keys, the h tag, and the reflector at sendmail.net   dave

Last message date: Sun Sep 30 17:11:28 PDT 2007
Archived on: Sun Sep 30 17:11:33 PDT 2007

• Messages sorted by: [ thread ] [ subject ] [ date ]
• More info on this list...