Archive of ietf-mxcomp, by date

Go to thread index
Go to main page for ietf-mxcomp

Page 2 of 12
[Prev Page] [Next Page] [First Page] [Last Page]

Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/06/2004
RE: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], terry, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821", Bill McQuillan, 12/06/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 12/05/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821", Frank Ellermann, 12/05/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/05/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 12/05/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 12/04/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821", Bill McQuillan, 12/04/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821", Hector Santos, 12/04/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/04/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821", Frank Ellermann, 12/04/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/03/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/03/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/03/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/03/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Chris Haynes, 12/03/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/02/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/02/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/02/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/01/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey by Dean Anderson of av8. (fwd), Dean Anderson, 12/01/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/01/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Dean Anderson, 11/30/2004
Re: Source routing -- why not?, John R Levine, 11/30/2004
Re: Source routing -- why not?, Tony Finch, 11/30/2004
Re: Source routing -- why not?, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 11/30/2004
Re: Source routing -- why not?, Tony Finch, 11/30/2004
Re: Source routing -- why not?, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 11/30/2004
Re: Source routing -- why not?, Tony Finch, 11/30/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Danny Angus, 11/30/2004
Re: Source routing -- why not?, william(at)elan.net, 11/29/2004
Source routing -- why not?, John Levine, 11/29/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey by Dean Anderson of av8., Dean Anderson, 11/29/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Dean Anderson, 11/29/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Douglas Otis, 11/29/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Meng Weng Wong, 11/29/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey by Dean Anderson of av8., Matthew Elvey, 11/29/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 11/29/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 11/29/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], william(at)elan.net, 11/28/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 11/28/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 11/28/2004
RE: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Thomas Gal, 11/26/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 11/26/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 11/26/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 11/26/2004
RE: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Thomas Gal, 11/26/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Dean Anderson, 11/26/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Dean Anderson, 11/26/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Danny Angus, 11/26/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Dean Anderson, 11/26/2004
Re: Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, william(at)elan.net, 11/26/2004
Complaint on personal attack by Matthew Elvey, Dean Anderson, 11/26/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Dean Anderson, 11/26/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Chris Haynes, 11/26/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 11/26/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], william(at)elan.net, 11/25/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 11/25/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 11/25/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, MW Mike Weiner \(5028\), 11/23/2004
Re: Status of MARID WG?, EdLevinson, 11/23/2004
Re: Status of MARID WG?, Andrew Newton, 11/23/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11/23/2004
Re: Status of MARID WG?, Andrew Newton, 11/23/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Jeff McConathy, 11/23/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Andrew Newton, 11/23/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11/23/2004
A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 11/23/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Dean Anderson, 11/22/2004
Re: path routing, Frank Ellermann, 11/22/2004
Re: path routing, John R Levine, 11/21/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Frank Ellermann, 11/21/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Alan DeKok, 11/21/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Dave Crocker, 11/21/2004
Re: People issues, Douglas Otis, 11/20/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Alan DeKok, 11/20/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Hector Santos, 11/20/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Hector Santos, 11/20/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Hector Santos, 11/20/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., John Levine, 11/20/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Dave Crocker, 11/20/2004
Re: FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Alan DeKok, 11/20/2004
FTC stuff 0) Lies 1)Yahoo & DK. 2)GoDaddy DNS & SPF & CSV. 3)Dean & FUSSP. 4)Testing 5)EFF, Anonymity., Matthew Elvey, 11/19/2004
Re: People issues, Greg Connor, 11/18/2004
People issues, Douglas Otis, 11/18/2004
MEDIA: Is Microsoft Ready to Assert IP Rights over the Internet?, william(at)elan.net, 11/17/2004
I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-emailredirection-traceheaders-00.txt (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 11/17/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11/17/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Dean Anderson, 11/16/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11/07/2004
SenderID != SPF (Was: Status of MARID WG?), wayne, 11/06/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Dean Anderson, 11/06/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 11/04/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Thomas Gal, 11/04/2004
Re: Status of MARID WG?, Dean Anderson, 11/04/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Dean Anderson, 11/04/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Dave Crocker, 11/04/2004
RE: Status of MARID WG?, Harry Katz, 11/04/2004
Re: Redirected Trace header draft, william(at)elan.net, 11/04/2004
Re: Status of MARID WG?, wayne, 11/03/2004
Status of MARID WG?, Dean Anderson, 11/03/2004
Re: Redirected Trace header draft, Matthew Elvey, 11/03/2004
MEDIA: Revised Sender ID does not impress Apache, Debian, william(at)elan.net, 11/03/2004
Redirected Trace header draft (was Processed-By or Transmitted-By header concept), william(at)elan.net, 11/02/2004
Re: Sender-ID != SPF, Douglas Otis, 11/01/2004
draft-katz-submitter-00, Harry Katz, 11/01/2004
draft-lyon-senderid-pra-00, Harry Katz, 11/01/2004
draft-lyon-senderid-core-00, Harry Katz, 11/01/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., Sam Varshavchik, 10/31/2004
RE: Sender-ID != SPF, Thomas Gal, 10/31/2004
RE: Sender-ID != SPF, Thomas Gal, 10/31/2004
Re: Sender-ID != SPF, Paul Iadonisi, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., John Levine, 10/31/2004
Re: Sender-ID != SPF, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 10/31/2004
Re: Sender-ID != SPF, Paul Iadonisi, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., Sam Varshavchik, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., James Couzens, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., Sam Varshavchik, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., wayne, 10/31/2004
Re: Sender-ID != SPF, James Couzens, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., Paul S. Brown, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., Koen Martens, 10/31/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., Paul Iadonisi, 10/30/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., John Levine, 10/30/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., Daniel Senie, 10/30/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., wayne, 10/30/2004
Re: SPF deployment, was RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision ..., John Levine, 10/30/2004
Re: Sender-ID != SPF, Douglas Otis, 10/29/2004
Re: Sender-ID != SPF, Alan DeKok, 10/29/2004
Sender-ID != SPF, Douglas Otis, 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), wayne, 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Andrew Newton, 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Andrew Newton, 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Andrew Newton, 10/29/2004
RE: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), MW Mike Weiner \(5028\), 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), James Couzens, 10/29/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Greg Connor, 10/28/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), wayne, 10/28/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), ned . freed, 10/28/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/28/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Stephane Bortzmeyer, 10/28/2004
RE: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Paul Iadonisi, 10/28/2004
RE: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10/27/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Markus Stumpf, 10/27/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Markus Stumpf, 10/27/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), John Levine, 10/27/2004
RE: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consens us-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 10/27/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/27/2004
RE: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Julian Mehnle, 10/27/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Alan DeKok, 10/27/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Andrew Newton, 10/27/2004
Re: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Matthew Elvey, 10/26/2004
RE: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/23/2004
RE: RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), Scott Hollenbeck, 10/22/2004
RFC 3929 on Alternative Decision Making Processes for Consensus-Blocked Decisions in the IETF (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/22/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Douglas Otis, 10/11/2004
Communication styles (was Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd) ), Alan DeKok, 10/11/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/10/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Douglas Otis, 10/10/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Hector Santos, 10/10/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Alan DeKok, 10/10/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Douglas Otis, 10/09/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Greg Connor, 10/08/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Greg Connor, 10/08/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), Douglas Otis, 10/07/2004
I-D ACTION:draft-leibzon-responsible-submitter-00.txt (fwd), william(at)elan.net, 10/07/2004
Regarding Microsoft comments to FTC regarding MARID and Sender ID, william(at)elan.net, 10/04/2004
Hackers conference, Mark Lentczner, 10/02/2004
Re: [spf-discuss] Trying to specify SPF Classic?, william(at)elan.net, 10/01/2004
Re: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 10/01/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Douglas Otis, 10/01/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, william(at)elan.net, 10/01/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Danny Angus, 10/01/2004
RE: IPR issues bieng tested in court in Europe - and London, England is the worlds biggest hub, Gordon Fecyk, 09/30/2004
RE: IPR issues bieng tested in court in Europe - and London, Engl and is the worlds biggest hub, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/30/2004
IPR issues bieng tested in court in Europe - and London, England is the worlds biggest hub, jpinkerton, 09/30/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/30/2004
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: [Maybe Spam] Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Danny Angus, 09/30/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with legacy SPF records?, Matthew Elvey, 09/30/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with legacy SPF records?, Douglas Otis, 09/29/2004
Re: [Maybe Spam] Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, william(at)elan.net, 09/29/2004
Re: [Maybe Spam] Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Matthew Elvey, 09/29/2004
Re: [Maybe Spam] Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Danny Angus, 09/29/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with legacy SPF records?, Matthew Elvey, 09/28/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, william(at)elan.net, 09/28/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, william(at)elan.net, 09/28/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Douglas Otis, 09/28/2004
RE: Article with Microsoft comments on future of Sender ID, Scott Hollenbeck, 09/28/2004
RE: Article with Microsoft comments on future of Sender ID, william(at)elan.net, 09/28/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Justin Mason, 09/28/2004
RE: Article with Microsoft comments on future of Sender ID, Scott Hollenbeck, 09/28/2004
Article with Microsoft comments on future of Sender ID, william(at)elan.net, 09/28/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Douglas Otis, 09/28/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Danny Angus, 09/28/2004
OT: RE: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, terry, 09/27/2004
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Alternative draft for SUBMITTER identity, william(at)elan.net, 09/27/2004
Re: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, Hector Santos, 09/27/2004
RE: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, william(at)elan.net, 09/27/2004
RE: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, Jim Lyon, 09/27/2004
RE: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, william(at)elan.net, 09/27/2004
RE: Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, Jim Lyon, 09/27/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Douglas Otis, 09/27/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, william(at)elan.net, 09/27/2004
Re: Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, Douglas Otis, 09/27/2004
Processed-By (or Transmitted-By) header concept, william(at)elan.net, 09/27/2004
Alternatives drafts for SUBMITTER identity, william(at)elan.net, 09/27/2004
Re: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (f orwarded by request), Marshall Rose, 09/27/2004
Re: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (f orwarded by request), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell@xxxxxxxxx>, 09/27/2004
Re: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (f orwarded by request), wayne, 09/27/2004
Re: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (f orwarded by request), Matt Sergeant, 09/27/2004
Re: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (f orwarded by request), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 09/27/2004
RE: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (forwarded by request), Douglas Otis, 09/27/2004
RE: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (f orwarded by request), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/27/2004
RE: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (f orwarded by request), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/27/2004
RE: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (forwarded by request), John Glube, 09/27/2004
mailing list for CSV/BATV pre-standards discussions, Dave Crocker, 09/27/2004
Re: [On Rewriting SMTP and DNS] RE: MARID to close - Comments/Suggestions, Graham Murray, 09/26/2004
Re: [On Rewriting SMTP and DNS] RE: MARID to close - Comments/Suggestions, John Levine, 09/26/2004
RE: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (forwarded by request), Gordon Fecyk, 09/25/2004
RE: [On Rewriting SMTP and DNS] RE: MARID to close - Comments/Suggestions, Gordon Fecyk, 09/25/2004
RE: [On Rewriting SMTP and DNS] RE: MARID to close - Comments/Sug gestions, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/25/2004
"Wasted" CSV-DNA lookups, John Leslie, 09/25/2004
Re: Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (forwarded by request), Greg Connor, 09/25/2004
Microsoft Statement regarding Sender I.D. Update and Plans (forwarded by request), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell@xxxxxxxxx>, 09/25/2004
[On Rewriting SMTP and DNS] RE: MARID to close - Comments/Suggestions, Gordon Fecyk, 09/24/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Rand Wacker, 09/24/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Graeme Leith, 09/24/2004
Re: MARID Monday, Andrew Newton, 09/24/2004
Re: ITU, was Disappointed, John Levine, 09/24/2004
Re: Disappointed, Wietse Venema, 09/24/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Hector Santos, 09/24/2004
RE: Disappointed, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/24/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Wietse Venema, 09/24/2004
Re: Disappointed, Andrew Newton, 09/24/2004
Re: MARID to close, Andrew Newton, 09/24/2004
Re: by the numbers, Andrew Newton, 09/24/2004
Re: by the numbers, wayne, 09/24/2004
Re: by the numbers, Hector Santos, 09/24/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Tony Finch, 09/24/2004
Re: by the numbers, wayne, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Douglas Otis, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Hector Santos, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Douglas Otis, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Douglas Otis, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Alan DeKok, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Dave Crocker, 09/23/2004
Re: A Note of Appreciation, Margaret Olson, 09/23/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with legacy SPF records?, Douglas Otis, 09/23/2004
The Village Idiot's point of view (Re: The Crystal Ball Says...), Hadmut Danisch, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Douglas Otis, 09/23/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with legacy SPF records?, Matthew Elvey, 09/23/2004
Re: WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Hector Santos, 09/22/2004
Re: Disappointed, Hector Santos, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close - Comments/Suggestions, Hector Santos, 09/22/2004
WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Douglas Otis, 09/22/2004
Disappointed, yet..not surprised (was Re: Disappointed), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq. <amitchell@xxxxxxxxx>, 09/22/2004
draft-ietf-marid-protocol-03 (was: New Drafts), Frank Ellermann, 09/22/2004
RE: Disappointed, william(at)elan.net, 09/22/2004
[OK, one more time...] RE: Disappointed, Gordon Fecyk, 09/22/2004
RE: Disappointed, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/22/2004
WG to close ; Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Matthew Elvey, 09/22/2004
The Crystal Ball Says..., Gordon Fecyk, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Ryan Ordway, 09/22/2004
RE: A Note of Appreciation, John Glube, 09/22/2004
RE: MARID to close, Rik van Riel, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, csm, 09/22/2004
Re: A Note of Appreciation, Hadmut Danisch, 09/22/2004
RE: A Note of Appreciation, John Glube, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Mark, 09/22/2004
Re: Disappointed, Hadmut Danisch, 09/22/2004
RE: Disappointed, Ian Peter, 09/22/2004
RE: MARID to close, william(at)elan.net, 09/22/2004
Re: A Note of Appreciation, wayne, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Yakov Shafranovich, 09/22/2004
Re: regarding the trademark for "Sender ID", Frank Ellermann, 09/22/2004
Re: Disappointed, Paul Iadonisi, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Michael Hammer, 09/22/2004
RE: MARID to close, Markley, Mike, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, mxcomp, 09/22/2004
RE: MARID to close, terry, 09/22/2004
Disappointed, Greg Connor, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Frank Ellermann, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Mark Baugher, 09/22/2004
A Note of Appreciation, Yakov Shafranovich, 09/22/2004
WG Action: Conclusion of MTA Authorization Records in DNS (marid), The IESG, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Andrew Newton, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Hadmut Danisch, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, Hadmut Danisch, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, william(at)elan.net, 09/22/2004
Re: MARID to close, wayne, 09/22/2004
MARID to close, Ted Hardie, 09/22/2004
Re: regarding the trademark for "Sender ID", Hector Santos, 09/22/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Douglas Otis, 09/22/2004
Re: Existing implementation of SPF1 for Exchange 2000?, wayne, 09/21/2004
Re: Existing implementation of SPF1 for Exchange 2000?, wayne, 09/21/2004
Re: regarding the trademark for "Sender ID", John Levine, 09/21/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF? (new revisions), Matthew Elvey, 09/21/2004
Re: MARID Monday, wayne, 09/21/2004
RE: regarding the trademark for "Sender ID", Gordon Fecyk, 09/21/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF?, Douglas Otis, 09/21/2004
Re: regarding the trademark for "Sender ID", wayne, 09/21/2004
Re: regarding the trademark for "Sender ID", wayne, 09/21/2004
regarding the trademark for "Sender ID", Andrew Newton, 09/21/2004
RE: IANAL and neither are you, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/21/2004
IANAL and neither are you, Roy Badami, 09/21/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, David Woodhouse, 09/21/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, Douglas Otis, 09/21/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF?, Matt Sergeant, 09/21/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/21/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/21/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/21/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, Frank Ellermann, 09/20/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF?, John Leslie, 09/20/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF?, Matthew Elvey, 09/20/2004
Re: Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF?, Douglas Otis, 09/20/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, Douglas Otis, 09/20/2004
Make CSV backwards compatible with SPF?, Matthew Elvey, 09/20/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00, Frank Ellermann, 09/20/2004
Re: Existing implementation of SPF1 for Exchange 2000?, James Couzens, 09/20/2004
MARID Monday, Andrew Newton, 09/20/2004
Re: Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00 (Was: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Douglas Otis, 09/20/2004
RE: SenderID name in use by somebody else, william(at)elan.net, 09/20/2004
Re: SenderID name in use by somebody else, Paul S. Brown, 09/20/2004
RE: SenderID name in use by somebody else, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/20/2004
Language too strict in draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00 (Was: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/20/2004
Re: New drafts, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/20/2004
Re: Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Douglas Otis, 09/19/2004
Re: draft-ietf-marid-protocol-03 (was: New Drafts), Frank Ellermann, 09/19/2004
Re: Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Dave Crocker, 09/19/2004
Re: Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Mark C. Langston, 09/19/2004
Re: Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Dave Crocker, 09/19/2004
Re: Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Chris Haynes, 09/19/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, Dave Crocker, 09/19/2004
Re: Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Mark C. Langston, 09/19/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, David Woodhouse, 09/19/2004
Re: SenderID name in use by somebody else, Andrew Newton, 09/19/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, Tony Finch, 09/19/2004
SenderID name in use by somebody else, william(at)elan.net, 09/19/2004
Proposal for VERIFIED keyword, Chris Haynes, 09/19/2004
Re: Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Chris Haynes, 09/19/2004
Re: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications, Douglas Otis, 09/18/2004
Trust, and who knows what (was Re: SPF abused by spammers ), Alan DeKok, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should (not) authenticate multiple identities, Matthew Elvey, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, Douglas Otis, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, Claus F�rber, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, william(at)elan.net, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, Meng Weng Wong, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, william(at)elan.net, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, Douglas Otis, 09/18/2004
Re: Why we should authenticate multiple identities, David Woodhouse, 09/18/2004
draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00 (was: New Drafts), Frank Ellermann, 09/18/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Chris Haynes, 09/18/2004
Re: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications, Meng Weng Wong, 09/18/2004
Why we should authenticate multiple identities, Meng Weng Wong, 09/18/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Alan DeKok, 09/18/2004
RE: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications, Gordon Fecyk, 09/18/2004
Re: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, Pete Resnick, 09/18/2004
Re: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications (Safe to Read Even If You Are Avoiding Reading the Patents), Hadmut Danisch, 09/18/2004
Re: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications, David Woodhouse, 09/18/2004
Re: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications, Roy Badami, 09/18/2004
Re: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications, David Woodhouse, 09/18/2004
SPF Archive?, Re: ANNOUNCE: I-D draft-ietf-marid-SPF3-00, etc., Matthew Elvey, 09/17/2004
Re: IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications (Safe to Read Even If You Are Avoiding Reading the Patents), Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 09/17/2004
Re: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, william(at)elan.net, 09/17/2004
Re: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, Bill McQuillan, 09/17/2004
IPR: analysis of Microsoft patent applications, John Levine, 09/17/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Douglas Otis, 09/17/2004
minor comments on draft-ietf-marid-protocol-03.txt, Nate Leon, 09/17/2004
Re: Existing implementation of SPF1 for Exchange 2000?, Meng Weng Wong, 09/17/2004
RE: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, william(at)elan.net, 09/17/2004
Re: ANNOUNCE: I-D draft-ietf-marid-SPF3-00, etc., Douglas Otis, 09/17/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Chris Haynes, 09/17/2004
RE: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, Pete Resnick, 09/17/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Alan DeKok, 09/17/2004
RE: Patent Application 683624, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/17/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Chris Haynes, 09/17/2004
Re: migration strategy for "-all", David Woodhouse, 09/17/2004
Re: Moving on from the train wreck, Tom Kistner, 09/17/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, Peter Koch, 09/17/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Tony Finch, 09/17/2004
Re: Patent Application 683624, Douglas Otis, 09/17/2004
migration strategy for "-all", Meng Weng Wong, 09/17/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Alan DeKok, 09/17/2004
RE: Microsoft's Updated Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-iet f-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, william(at)elan.net, 09/17/2004
Existing implementation of SPF1 for Exchange 2000?, Gordon Fecyk, 09/17/2004
Re: Moving on from the train wreck, David Woodhouse, 09/17/2004
RE: Microsoft's Updated Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-iet f-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/17/2004
Re: Moving on from the train wreck, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/17/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Tony Finch, 09/17/2004
Moving on from the train wreck, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 09/17/2004
Re: by the numbers, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/17/2004
Re: "include" directive in -03 SPF draft, Daniel Quinlan, 09/17/2004
TECH-DOC: Re: I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00.txt, Hector Santos, 09/17/2004
Re: Patent Application 683624, william(at)elan.net, 09/16/2004
Re: Patent Application 683624, Douglas Otis, 09/16/2004
Re: "include" directive in -03 SPF draft, Meng Weng Wong, 09/16/2004
ANNOUNCE: I-D draft-ietf-marid-SPF3-00, etc., Matthew Elvey, 09/16/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header-00.txt (fwd), Hector Santos, 09/16/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers - Fixing RFC 2821 issues, Hector Santos, 09/16/2004
Patent Application 683624, Meng Weng Wong, 09/16/2004
Re: I-D ACTION:draft-kucherawy-sender-auth-header-00.txt (fwd), Frank Ellermann, 09/16/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Douglas Otis, 09/16/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Mark, 09/16/2004
RE: SPF abused by spammers, Scott Kitterman, 09/16/2004
IANAL and neither are you, Daniel Quinlan, 09/16/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Alan DeKok, 09/16/2004
RE: [spf-discuss] Re: Microsoft's Updated Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, william(at)elan.net, 09/16/2004
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-protocol-03.txt, Internet-Drafts, 09/16/2004
I-D ACTION:draft-ietf-marid-mailfrom-00.txt, Internet-Drafts, 09/16/2004
Re: AOL on Sender I.D.., Carl Hutzler, 09/16/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Douglas Otis, 09/16/2004
Re: Microsoft's Updated Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, william(at)elan.net, 09/16/2004
Re: Microsoft's Updated Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, Andrew Newton, 09/16/2004
Re: AOL on Sender I.D.., Andrew Newton, 09/16/2004
Re: FW: Microsoft's Updated Statement about IPR Claimed in <draft-ietf-marid-core-03.txt> and <draft-ietf-marid-pra-00.txt> in Combination, william(at)elan.net, 09/16/2004
Re: New drafts, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 09/16/2004
Re: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, william(at)elan.net, 09/16/2004
New drafts, Mark Lentczner, 09/16/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 09/16/2004
AOL on Sender I.D.., Anne P. Mitchell, Esq., 09/15/2004
Re: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, Frank Ellermann, 09/15/2004
FTC Email Authentication Summit Nov 9,10 Washington DC, Carl Hutzler, 09/15/2004
Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Frank Ellermann, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Frank Ellermann, 09/15/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Alan DeKok, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Douglas Otis, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflag day., Alan DeKok, 09/15/2004
reminder: 3 message/day limit, Marshall Rose, 09/15/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, Rand Wacker, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Chuck Mead, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediatelyrepresentsaflagday., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Rik van Riel, 09/15/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Douglas Otis, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Douglas Otis, 09/15/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediatelyrepresentsaflagday., Markus Stumpf, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Daniel Quinlan, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Chuck Mead, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Markus Stumpf, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediatelyrepresentsaflagday., Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, william(at)elan.net, 09/15/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, Rand Wacker, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediatelyrepresentsaflagday., Mark, 09/15/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
RE: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents aflag day., terry, 09/15/2004
Re: MTAMARK and RFC 2317, was Re: HELO and Unified, william(at)elan.net, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Kevin Peuhkurinen, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflagday., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediatelyrepresentsaflag day., Mark, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Andrew Newton, 09/15/2004
Re: A&R BCP & Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: TECH-ERROR: SenderID sets recomendation for forwarders that are not compatible with RFC 2822, David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Matthew Elvey, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Chuck Mead, 09/15/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, Rand Wacker, 09/15/2004
A&R BCP & Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Matthew Elvey, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Kevin Peuhkurinen, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflagday., Mark, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Jim Fenton, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Meng Weng Wong, 09/15/2004
RE: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflagday., Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflag day., Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
Re: MTAMARK and RFC 2317, was Re: HELO and Unified, Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
RE: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflag day., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, Rik van Riel, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Rik van Riel, 09/15/2004
RE: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflagday., terry, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflag day., Mark, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Chuck Mead, 09/15/2004
Re: co-chair judgment of consensus related to last call period of 23-Aug-2004 to 10-Sept-2004, Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
RE: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflag day., Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
RE: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately representsaflag day., terry, 09/15/2004
Re: Interpreting "v=spf1", Margaret Olson, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., David Woodhouse, 09/15/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Alan DeKok, 09/15/2004
Re: HELO and Unified, Andrew Newton, 09/15/2004
RE: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents aflag day., Tony Finch, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: DNS Record Types, Eric A. Hall, 09/15/2004
Re: DEPLOY: Permitting '-all' to be used immediately represents a flag day., Kevin Peuhkurinen, 09/15/2004
Re: SPF abused by spammers, Margaret Olson, 09/15/2004

Page 2 of 12
[Prev Page] [Next Page] [First Page] [Last Page]

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.