Archive of ietf-mailsig, by thread

• RE: revised Proposed Charter, (continued)
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Kuhtz, Christian
    • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Michael Thomas
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Earl Hood
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Thomas Roessler
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Michael Thomas
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • DNS stuff (was Re: revised Proposed Charter), Andrew Newton
      • Re: DNS stuff (was Re: revised Proposed Charter), Dave Crocker
      • Re: DNS stuff (was Re: revised Proposed Charter), Michael Thomas
      • Re: DNS stuff (was Re: revised Proposed Charter), Dave Crocker
      • Re: DNS stuff (was Re: revised Proposed Charter), Michael Thomas
      • Re: DNS stuff, wayne
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Hector Santos
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Michael Thomas
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Jim Fenton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Jim Fenton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Andrew Newton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Earl Hood
      • replay attacks, was Re: revised Proposed Charter, Tony Finch
      • Re: replay attacks, was Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: replay attacks, was Re: revised Proposed Charter, Miles Libbey
    • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Jim Fenton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • RE: revised Proposed Charter, James Scott
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Earl Hood
      • RE: revised Proposed Charter, James Scott
      • RE: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • QUERY: Key Server Choices, Dave Crocker
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Ned Freed
      • accreditation, Michael Thomas
      • Re: accreditation, Dave Crocker
      • Re: accreditation, Michael Thomas
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Arvel Hathcock
      • RE: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Dennis Dayman
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, SM
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Earl Hood
      • RE: QUERY: Key Server Choices, James Scott
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, wayne
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Tony Finch
      • Re: QUERY: Key Server Choices, Hector Santos
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Earl Hood
      • RE: revised Proposed Charter, James Scott
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Earl Hood
      • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • RE: revised Proposed Charter, James Scott
      • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Michael Thomas
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Earl Hood
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Earl Hood
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Michael Thomas
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Ned Freed
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
    • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Jim Fenton
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Ned Freed
      • Re: revised Proposed Charter, Arvel Hathcock
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: revised Proposed Charter, william(at)elan.net
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: revised Proposed Charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• dkim-base-00: misc. comments, Thomas Roessler
  • Re: dkim-base-00: misc. comments, Earl Hood
• draft-allman-dkim-base-00 6.6: Advice given would invalidate the DKIM signature., Thomas Roessler
  • Re: draft-allman-dkim-base-00 6.6: Advice given would invalidate the DKIM signature., Earl Hood
    • Re: draft-allman-dkim-base-00 6.6: Advice given would invalidate the DKIM signature., Jim Fenton
  • Re: draft-allman-dkim-base-00 6.6: Advice given would invalidate the DKIM signature., Eric Allman
• nowsp considered harmful, Thomas Roessler
  • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Frank Ellermann
    • XINDX, Dave Crocker
      • Re: XINDX, Frank Ellermann
  • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Tony Hansen
  • Real use cases for justify nowsp? (was Re: nowsp considered harmful), Earl Hood
  • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Eric Allman
    • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Frank Ellermann
  • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Nathaniel Borenstein
    • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Jim Fenton
    • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Earl Hood
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Hector Santos
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: nowsp considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Tony Hansen
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Michael Thomas
    • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Michael Thomas
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Thomas Roessler
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Michael Thomas
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Douglas Otis
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Thomas Roessler
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Douglas Otis
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Michael Thomas
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Douglas Otis
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Earl Hood
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Hector Santos
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Dave Crocker
      • Re: nowsp considered harmful, Thomas Roessler
  • RE: nowsp considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: nowsp considered harmful, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, Earl Hood
  • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, SM
    • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, SM
      • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, SM
  • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, Michael Thomas
    • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, Dave Crocker
    • Re: DKIM: Does DKIM provide adequate protection from a malicious domain from spoofing a sender's address?, Earl Hood
• RE: DKIM - Header Fields, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: DKIM - DNS RR, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Additional Key Management Methods RE: DKIM - DNS RR, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: Additional Key Management Methods RE: DKIM - DNS RR, Arvel Hathcock
• RE: DKIM - Version, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: DKIM - Version, william(at)elan.net
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: DKIM - Version, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Miles Libbey
• MASS Proposals Comparison Matrix, william(at)elan.net
  • Re: MASS Proposals Comparison Matrix, Douglas Otis
    • Re: MASS Proposals Comparison Matrix, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: MASS Proposals Comparison Matrix, Earl Hood
      • Re: MASS Proposals Comparison Matrix, william(at)elan.net
  • Re: MASS Proposals Comparison Matrix, Arvel Hathcock
    • Re: MASS Proposals Comparison Matrix, william(at)elan.net
• Content-Digest: Digesting raw vs MIME encoded data, Earl Hood
  • Re: Content-Digest: Digesting raw vs MIME encoded data, william(at)elan.net
    • Re: Content-Digest: Digesting raw vs MIME encoded data, Thomas Roessler
      • Re: Content-Digest: Digesting raw vs MIME encoded data, william(at)elan.net
• Re: wildcards, william(at)elan.net
  • Re: wildcards, John Levine
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: wildcards, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• RE: Why DKIM useful and different from PGP or S/MIME, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Content-Digest: TEXT canonicalization, Earl Hood
  • Re: Content-Digest: TEXT canonicalization, william(at)elan.net
    • Re: Content-Digest: TEXT canonicalization, Earl Hood
• Content-Digest: MIMEFORM canonicalization, Earl Hood
  • Re: Content-Digest: MIMEFORM canonicalization, william(at)elan.net
    • Re: Content-Digest: MIMEFORM canonicalization, Earl Hood
• RE: wildcards, was dkim technology?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • Re: wildcards, Frank Ellermann
• DKIM: signer address, Earl Hood
  • Re: DKIM: signer address, Jim Fenton
• DKIM: Authentication-Results, Earl Hood
  • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Tony Hansen
    • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, SM
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, SM
    • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Murray S. Kucherawy
    • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, wayne
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Douglas Otis
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, wayne
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Douglas Otis
      • Re: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Arvel Hathcock
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: DKIM: Authentication-Results, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
• Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Earl Hood
  • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Ned Freed
    • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Earl Hood
      • DKIM: t=SecondsSince1970, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: t=SecondsSince1970, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: t=SecondsSince1970, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM: t=SecondsSince1970, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: t=SecondsSince1970, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: t=SecondsSince1970, wayne
      • Re: DKIM: t=SecondsSince1970, william(at)elan.net
      • DKIM: Key revocation, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: Key revocation, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Key revocation, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: Key revocation, Douglas Otis
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), william(at)elan.net
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Ned Freed
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Dave Crocker
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Douglas Otis
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Ned Freed
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Dave Crocker
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Earl Hood
    • DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Michael Thomas
      • Why DKIM useful and different from PGP or S/MIME, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, SM
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Michael Thomas
      • operations and development dkim mailing lists, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Douglas Otis
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Nathaniel Borenstein
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM: c=simple is aspirational, Earl Hood
  • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), william(at)elan.net
    • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Michael Thomas
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), william(at)elan.net
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Michael Thomas
    • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Earl Hood
      • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Ned Freed
  • Options and alternatives, Dave Crocker
  • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Thomas Roessler
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: Feedback on DKIM draft (long), Earl Hood
      • DKIM: Canonicalization, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, wayne
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Douglas Otis
      • Goldilocks Canonicalization, Michael Thomas
      • Re: Goldilocks Canonicalization, Douglas Otis
      • Re: Goldilocks Canonicalization, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Jon Callas
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Douglas Otis
      • Re: DKIM: Canonicalization, Arvel Hathcock
• MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
  • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, william(at)elan.net
    • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
    • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
  • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, wayne
    • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, wayne
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Ned Freed
    • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, wayne
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Ned Freed
      • Proposed change to proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Proposed change to proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: Proposed change to proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Proposed change to proposed Charter, Douglas Otis
      • Re: Proposed change to proposed Charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: Proposed change to proposed Charter, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • RE: Proposed change to proposed Charter, Dennis Dayman
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Michael Thomas
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, william(at)elan.net
      • IPR declaration requirement, Dave Crocker
      • Re: IPR declaration requirement, Ned Freed
      • Re: IPR declaration requirement, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Tony Hansen
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Jim Fenton
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Hector Santos
  • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, william(at)elan.net
      • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Earl Hood
  • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, wayne
  • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Michael Thomas
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, william(at)elan.net
  • RE: Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
  • RE: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: MASS BOF Agenda and Proposed charter, Dave Crocker
• [Sam Hartman] Please post BOF agenda and proposed charter, Sam Hartman
• dkim technology?, Dave Crocker
  • Re: dkim technology?, wayne
    • Re: dkim technology?, Dave Crocker
      • Re: dkim technology?, wayne
      • Re: dkim technology?, Douglas Otis
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, John Levine
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, wayne
      • Re: wildcards, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, Michael Thomas
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, John R Levine
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, Michael Thomas
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, John R Levine
      • Re: wildcards, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: wildcards, John Levine
      • Re: wildcards, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: wildcards, Michael Thomas
      • Re: wildcards, was dkim technology?, Michael Thomas
    • wildcards, was Re: dkim technology?, Tony Finch
      • Re: wildcards, was Re: dkim technology?, wayne
      • Re: wildcards, was Re: dkim technology?, Jim Fenton
      • Re: wildcards, was Re: dkim technology?, Tony Finch
      • Re: wildcards, was Re: dkim technology?, John Levine
      • Re: wildcards, was Re: dkim technology?, wayne
• DKIM licensing, Justin Mason
  • Re: DKIM licensing, Arvel Hathcock
    • Re: DKIM licensing, David Woodhouse
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM licensing, David Woodhouse
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM licensing, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM licensing, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Chip Mefford
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Dave Crocker
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Chip Mefford
      • Re: DKIM licensing, wayne
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Murray S. Kucherawy
      • Re: DKIM licensing, wayne
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Andrew Newton
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Justin Mason
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Sam Hartman
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Dave Crocker
      • IPR disclosures?, Thomas Roessler
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Dave Crocker
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Sam Hartman
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Sam Hartman
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Hector Santos
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Dave Crocker
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Hector Santos
      • DKIM technical inadequacies [Re: IPR disclosures?], Hector Santos
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Jon Callas
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Hector Santos
      • Re: IPR disclosures?, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM licensing, Arvel Hathcock
• Listing of DKIM implementations, Dave Crocker
• Content-Digest & Edigest fields draft, william(at)elan.net
• DKIM, Dave Crocker
  • Re: DKIM, wayne
  • Re: DKIM, David Woodhouse
    • Re: DKIM, Michael Weiner
    • Re: DKIM, Arvel Hathcock
  • Re: DKIM, william(at)elan.net
    • Re: DKIM, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM, Andrew Newton
      • Re: DKIM, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: DKIM, Andrew Newton
      • Re: DKIM, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM, wayne
      • Re: DKIM, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM, wayne
      • Re: DKIM, Frank Ellermann
      • Re: DKIM, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM, Tony Hansen
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, Michael Thomas
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, Tony Finch
      • Re: DKIM - Selector, Arvel Hathcock
      • Domainkeys TM (was Re: DKIM - Selector), domainkeys-feedbackbase02
      • Re: Domainkeys TM (was Re: DKIM - Selector), Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM - Version, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Version, Jim Fenton
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Ned Freed
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Hector Santos
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Hector Santos
      • Re: DKIM - Header Fields, Earl Hood
      • Re: DKIM - DNS RR, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - DNS RR, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - DNS RR, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - DNS RR, Arvel Hathcock
      • Re: DKIM - DNS RR, william(at)elan.net
      • Re: DKIM - Other Inconsistancies, william(at)elan.net
      • new trace header fields, was Re: DKIM, Tony Finch
      • Re: new trace header fields, was Re: DKIM, Jim Fenton
    • Re: DKIM, Dave Crocker
  • <Possible follow-ups>
  • RE: DKIM, Hallam-Baker, Phillip
    • RE: DKIM, william(at)elan.net
• Answers to the escaping issue, Andrew Newton
• What am I missing?, Andrew Newton
  • Re: What am I missing?, domainkeys-feedbackbase02
    • Re: What am I missing?, Andrew Newton

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.