Archive of ietf-822, by thread

• Re: Confusing UAs considered harmful (was *Reply-to* considered harmful), (continued)
  • Re: Confusing UAs considered harmful (was *Reply-to* considered harmful), Paul Jakma
  • Re: *Reply-to* considered harmful, Frank Ellermann
  • Re: *Reply-to* considered harmful (was Re: Understanding response protocols), Paul Jakma
  • Unhelpful behavior of many MUAs..., Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: ***SPAM-3*** Re: Understanding response protocols, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, D. J. Bernstein
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, D. J. Bernstein
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, D. J. Bernstein
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Philip Hazel
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Russ Allbery
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Philip Hazel
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Claus Färber
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Claus Färber
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Alan Barrett
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, D. J. Bernstein
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Simon Josefsson
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Simon Josefsson
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Russ Allbery
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Russ Allbery
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Keith Moore
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Russ Allbery
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Russ Allbery
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Arnt Gulbrandsen
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, D. J. Bernstein
  • Re: Understanding response protocols, Arnt Gulbrandsen
  • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Philip Hazel
  • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Charles Lindsey
  • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Charles Lindsey
    • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Philip Hazel
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Russ Allbery
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Tony Hansen
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
      • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Charles Lindsey
  • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Bill McQuillan
    • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Charles Lindsey
  • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Russ Allbery
    • Re: [Fwd: I-D ACTION:draft-moore-mail-nr-fields-00.txt], Keith Moore
• [Fwd: MSAs (RFC 2476), RFC 2822, and the Date field], Bruce Lilly
• Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, John C Klensin
  • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Laird Breyer
    • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Laird Breyer
• The Bcc Issue, Philip Hazel
  • Re: The Bcc Issue, Keith Moore
  • Re: The Bcc Issue, Nathaniel Borenstein
    • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
    • Re: The Bcc Issue, Dave Crocker
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Tony Hansen
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Tony Hansen
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Keith Moore
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Keith Moore
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Keith Moore
      • The job of an MSA, Dave Crocker
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Tony Hansen
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Keith Moore
      • Re: The job of an MSA, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: The job of an MSA, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Randall Gellens
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Tony Hansen
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Dave Crocker
      • Re: The job of an MSA, Randall Gellens
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Charles Lindsey
      • how to handle microsoft OLE messages?, Venkat Ramisetty
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Keith Moore
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Keith Moore
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Tony Hansen
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Kai Henningsen
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Jacob Palme
    • Re: The Bcc Issue, Jacob Palme
      • To and CC without reply (was: the Bcc issue), Keith Moore
      • Message not available
      • Diabling Replies, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Diabling Replies, Tony Hansen
      • Re: Diabling Replies, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Diabling Replies, Tony Hansen
      • Re: Diabling Replies, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Diabling Replies, Kai Henningsen
      • Re: Diabling Replies, Dave Crocker
      • Disabling Replies, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Disabling Replies, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Diabling Replies, Kai Henningsen
  • Re: The Bcc Issue, Arnt Gulbrandsen
    • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
  • Re: The Bcc Issue, Tony Hansen
  • Message-ID and Bcc Was: The Bcc Issue, Jacob Palme
    • Re: Message-ID and Bcc Was: The Bcc Issue, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: The Bcc Issue, Claus Färber
    • Re: The Bcc Issue, Kai Henningsen
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Jacob Palme
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Philip Hazel
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Nick Ing-Simmons
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Jacob Palme
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
    • Re: The Bcc Issue, Philip Hazel
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Philip Hazel
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Bill McQuillan
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: The Bcc Issue, Tony Hansen
      • Mail agents and definitions (Was Re: The Bcc Issue), Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mail agents and definitions (Was Re: The Bcc Issue), Cyrus Daboo
      • draft-crocker-email-arch, Dave Crocker
• Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, The IESG
  • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Bruce Lilly
    • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Kai Henningsen
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
    • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Tony Hansen
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Eric A. Hall
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Valdis . Kletnieks
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Tony Hansen
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Valdis . Kletnieks
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Eric A. Hall
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Eric A. Hall
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Bill McQuillan
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Laird Breyer
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, D. J. Bernstein
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Tony Hansen
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, D. J. Bernstein
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Nick Ing-Simmons
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Tony Hansen
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, D. J. Bernstein
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, John C Klensin
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Bruce Lilly
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Eric A. Hall
    • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Keith Moore
      • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, ned+ietf-822
    • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Robert Elz
    • Re: Last Call: 'The APPLICATION/MBOX Media-Type' to Proposed Standard, Charles Lindsey
• RFC validation samples?, Laird Breyer
  • Re: RFC validation samples?, Keith Moore
    • Re: RFC validation samples?, Nick Ing-Simmons
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Keith Moore
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Keith Moore
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Bruce Lilly
    • Re: RFC validation samples?, Bruce Lilly
    • Re: RFC validation samples?, Laird Breyer
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Laird Breyer
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Keith Moore
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Laird Breyer
  • Re: RFC validation samples?, Bruce Lilly
    • Re: RFC validation samples?, Laird Breyer
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Laird Breyer
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: RFC validation samples?, Laird Breyer
• Has IANA gone mad?, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Tony Hansen
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Has IANA gone mad?, Scott Hollenbeck
    • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Lyndon Nerenberg
      • RE: Has IANA gone mad?, Scott Hollenbeck
      • RE: Has IANA gone mad?, Lyndon Nerenberg
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, ned+ietf-822
      • RE: Has IANA gone mad?, Scott Hollenbeck
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Kai Henningsen
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Tony Hansen
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, Kai Henningsen
      • Re: Has IANA gone mad?, ned+ietf-822
      • RE: Has IANA gone mad?, Scott Hollenbeck
• Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
  • RE: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
    • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Keith Moore
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
    • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
  • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
    • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
    • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Hector Santos
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Hector Santos
      • Re: Mandatory From field, anonymity, and hacks, Charles Lindsey
• Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Tanu Mutreja
  • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Keith Moore
  • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Bruce Lilly
    • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Keith Moore
  • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Graham Klyne
    • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Keith Moore
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Russ Allbery
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Bruce Lilly
      • Re: Suggestion : New Content-Disposition parameters..., Keith Moore
      • Email archiving (was: New Content-Disposition...), Graham Klyne
      • Re: Email archiving (was: New Content-Disposition...), Keith Moore
• content-type: text/plain; magic=on; magic=off, Arnt Gulbrandsen
  • Re: content-type: text/plain; magic=on; magic=off, Keith Moore
    • Re: content-type: text/plain; magic=on; magic=off, ned+ietf-822
  • Re: content-type: text/plain; magic=on; magic=off, Hector Santos
• Re: Last Call: 'Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF' to Draft Standard, Graham Klyne
  • Re: Last Call: 'Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF' to Draft Standard, Dave Crocker
    • Re: Last Call: 'Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF' to Draft Standard, ned+ietf-822
  • Re: Last Call: 'Augmented BNF for Syntax Specifications: ABNF' to Draft Standard, Dave Crocker
• More on mail message header fields, Graham Klyne
  • Re: More on mail message header fields, Keith Moore
    • Re: More on mail message header fields, Graham Klyne
  • Re: More on mail message header fields, Charles Lindsey
    • Re: More on mail message header fields, Graham Klyne
      • Re: More on mail message header fields, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: More on mail message header fields, Keith Moore
  • Re: More on mail message header fields, Charles Lindsey
    • Re: More on mail message header fields, Graham Klyne
      • Re: More on mail message header fields, Charles Lindsey
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: More on mail message header fields, Bruce Lilly
• Best practice headers, Sean Donelan
• draft-klyne-hdrreg-mail-04, Graham Klyne
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • Re: draft-klyne-hdrreg-mail-04, Graham Klyne
• Mail/MIME permanent header registrations, Graham Klyne
  • Re: Mail/MIME permanent header registrations, ned+ietf-822
• Is Accept-language an email header field?, Graham Klyne
  • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Keith Moore
    • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Graham Klyne
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, ned+ietf-822
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Graham Klyne
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Keith Moore
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Jacob Palme
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Graham Klyne
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Keith Moore
      • Re: Is Accept-language an email header field?, Graham Klyne
• Re: =?utf-8*la*?q?Re:_?= Re: Sv: Ant: Sv: Re:, Charles Lindsey
  • Re: =?utf-8*la*?q?Re:_?= Re: Sv: Ant: Sv: Re:, Charles Lindsey
• SMTP implementations omitting Seconds in the Received time-stamp, Philip Miller
• why spamassassin sucks, Keith Moore
  • Re: why spamassassin sucks, Keith Moore
• New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
  • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
    • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Adam M. Costello
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Simon Josefsson
    • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
    • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
    • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Adam M. Costello
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bill McQuillan
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Adam M. Costello
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bill McQuillan
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bill McQuillan
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt, Frank Ellermann
      • draft-duerst-archived-at-04 (was: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-03.txt), Frank Ellermann
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Charles Lindsey
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • General considerations for new message field specifications, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: General considerations for new message field specifications, Keith Moore
      • Re: General considerations for new message field specifications, Peter Koch
      • Re: General considerations for new message field specifications, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Graham Klyne
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Keith Moore
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Bruce Lilly
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Martin Duerst
      • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Adam M. Costello
  • Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Charles Lindsey
  • Microsoft Patent - Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Hector Santos
    • Re: Microsoft Patent - Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: Microsoft Patent - Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Tim Kehres
      • Re: Microsoft Patent - Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Nick Shelness
      • Re: Microsoft Patent - Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Rolf E. Sonneveld
      • Re: Microsoft Patent - Re: New Internet Draft: draft-duerst-archived-at-00.txt, Dave Crocker

The web site for this mailing list is sponsored by the Internet Mail Consortium. If you have any suggestions for additions or corrections to this Web page, please send them to phoffman@imc.org.