Archive of ietf-mxcomp, by date

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

Page 1 of 12
[Prev Page] [Next Page] [First Page] [Last Page]

Re: document, jwkckid1, 01/07/2008
DTBAVPLRAYMZL, bwijnen, 12/05/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Douglas Otis, 04/03/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Randy Smith, 04/02/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Douglas Otis, 03/29/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Jeff Macdonald, 03/28/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Dean Anderson, 03/28/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, william(at)elan.net, 03/28/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Randy Smith, 03/28/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Randy Smith, 03/28/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Douglas Otis, 03/26/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Frank Ellermann, 03/25/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, HECTOR SANTOS, 03/25/2007
Re: Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Frank Ellermann, 03/23/2007
Mail Server Registries and Foreign Sender Authentication: A Proposal, Randy Smith, 03/23/2007
Mail System Error - Returned Mail, djb, 12/11/2006
Re: Doug attack scenarios without SPF, Douglas Otis, 11/20/2006
Re: Doug attack scenarios without SPF, Dean Anderson, 11/20/2006
Re: Doug attack scenarios without SPF, Markus Stumpf, 11/18/2006
Re: Doug attack scenarios without SPF, John Leslie, 11/10/2006
Doug attack scenarios without SPF, William Leibzon, 11/10/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Dean Anderson, 11/10/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Dean Anderson, 11/10/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/10/2006
Interesting (ab)uses of DNS (was: Trouble with Sender Authentication), Frank Ellermann, 11/10/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, John Levine, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, John Leslie, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, william(at)elan.net, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Julian Mehnle, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, william(at)elan.net, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, william(at)elan.net, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/09/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Scott Kitterman, 11/08/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/08/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Dean Anderson, 11/08/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/08/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/08/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Scott Kitterman, 11/08/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/08/2006
Lonlwgj, oran, 11/08/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Scott Kitterman, 11/07/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Julian Mehnle, 11/07/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/07/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/07/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Julian Mehnle, 11/07/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Frank Ellermann, 11/07/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/06/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/06/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Julian Mehnle, 11/06/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, wayne, 11/06/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, wayne, 11/06/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Greg Hewgill, 11/06/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Dean Anderson, 11/06/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/03/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, wayne, 11/02/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Douglas Otis, 11/02/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, wayne, 11/02/2006
Re: Trouble with Sender Authentication, Frank Ellermann, 11/02/2006
Trouble with Sender Authentication, K.J. Petrie, 11/02/2006
Ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx, kurt, 09/29/2006
Ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx, iesg, 09/10/2006
MAIL SYSTEM ERROR - RETURNED MAIL, iljitsch, 08/15/2006
Out of Office AutoReply: STATUS, Romascanu, Dan \(Dan\), 08/11/2006
Message could not be delivered, johans, 08/08/2006
ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx, phoffman, 08/02/2006
Message could not be delivered, rfc-editor, 08/02/2006
Mail System Error - Returned Mail, karl, 07/27/2006
report, ned . freed, 07/18/2006
Pbsnfjtzk, hannes . tschofenig, 07/14/2006
Mail System Error - Returned Mail, phoffman, 04/24/2006
Fwd: [spf-discuss] IAB Response to the Appeal from Julian Mehnle : ietf-mxcomp, Constantine A. Murenin, 03/04/2006
Re: IAB Response to the Appeal from Julian Mehnle, Julian Mehnle, 03/02/2006
Re: [spf-discuss] IAB Response to the Appeal from Julian Mehnle, Keith Moore, 03/02/2006
IAB Response to the Appeal from Julian Mehnle, Leslie Daigle, 03/02/2006
Re: Appeal of the IESG decision to publish draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Leslie Daigle, 02/08/2006
Appeal of the IESG decision to publish draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Julian Mehnle, 02/08/2006
A request for your support of: hutzler-spamops-05.txt, Carl Hutzler, 01/26/2006
Re: Resent-* oddities (was: Additional appeal against publication of draft-lyon-senderid-* [...]), Tony Finch, 09/01/2005
Resent-* oddities (was: Additional appeal against publication of draft-lyon-senderid-* [...]), Frank Ellermann, 08/31/2005
Re: Additional appeal against publication of draft-lyon-senderid-* in regards to its recommended use of Resent- header fields in the way that is inconsistant with RFC2822, Tony Finch, 08/31/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Additional appeal against publication of draft-lyon-senderid-* in regards to its recommended use of Resent- header fields in the way that is inconsistant with RFC2822, william(at)elan.net, 08/29/2005
Re: Additional appeal against publication of draft-lyon-senderid-* in regards to its recommended use of Resent- header fields in the way that is inconsistant with RFC2822, Frank Ellermann, 08/29/2005
Additional appeal against publication of draft-lyon-senderid-* in regards to its recommended use of Resent- header fields in the way that is inconsistant with RFC2822, william(at)elan.net, 08/29/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/28/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, John Glube, 08/28/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, william(at)elan.net, 08/27/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/27/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/27/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, John Glube, 08/27/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Douglas Otis, 08/27/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, william(at)elan.net, 08/27/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID<ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx>, Thomas Gal, 08/27/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/27/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Scott Kitterman, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Alan DeKok, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID <ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx>, Frank Ellermann, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, John Glube, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Douglas Otis, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, william(at)elan.net, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Alan DeKok, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Frank Ellermann, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 inconflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/26/2005
RE: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Jeff Macdonald, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Dotzero, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Andrew Newton, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Sam Hartman, 08/26/2005
RE: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflictwith referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08/26/2005
RE: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Douglas Otis, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Graham Murray, 08/26/2005
Re: [spf-discuss] Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Andrew Newton, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, wayne, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID <ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx>, Andrew Newton, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 MARID <ietf-mxcomp@xxxxxxx>, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Andrew Newton, 08/26/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Douglas Otis, 08/25/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Theodore Ts'o, 08/25/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 08/25/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Dave Crocker, 08/25/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Bill Sommerfeld, 08/25/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Ned Freed, 08/25/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Bill Sommerfeld, 08/25/2005
Re: Appeal: Publication of draft-lyon-senderid-core-01 in conflict with referenced draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02, Harald Tveit Alvestrand, 08/25/2005
FUD in Meng's "What To Do", Matthew Elvey, 08/23/2005
Re: Research question: How many legitimate mail sources are out there?, Alan DeKok, 08/13/2005
Re: Research question: How many legitimate mail sources are out there?, John Levine, 08/13/2005
Re: Research question: How many legitimate mail sources are out there?, Dean Anderson, 08/13/2005
Re: Research question: How many legitimate mail sources are out there?, Alan DeKok, 08/13/2005
Research question: How many legitimate mail sources are out there?, Matthew Elvey, 08/12/2005
Re: DNA, John Leslie, 07/28/2005
Re: DNA, John Leslie, 07/28/2005
Re: DNA, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/27/2005
Re: DNA, John Leslie, 07/26/2005
Re: A New Great Anti-Spam Tool??, Hector Santos, 07/26/2005
Re: A New Great Anti-Spam Tool??, william(at)elan.net, 07/26/2005
A New Great Anti-Spam Tool??, Hector Santos, 07/26/2005
RE: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Scott Kitterman, 07/24/2005
Re: DNA, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/24/2005
Re: DNA, Dave Crocker, 07/24/2005
Re: DNA, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/24/2005
DNA (was: Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID), Dave Crocker, 07/24/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/24/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Dave Crocker, 07/23/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Alan DeKok, 07/23/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 07/23/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Alan DeKok, 07/22/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, Frank Ellermann, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Alan DeKok, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Hector Santos, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, John Leslie, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, John Leslie, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, John Leslie, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/22/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Dave Crocker, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Alan DeKok, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Alan DeKok, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, gconnor, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Dave Crocker, 07/21/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, Frank Ellermann, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, John Leslie, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Alan DeKok, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Alan DeKok, 07/21/2005
RE: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Scott Kitterman, 07/21/2005
CSV, DKIM, SPF, reputation (was: SPF and SenderID), Frank Ellermann, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Kjetil Torgrim Homme, 07/21/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Greg Connor, 07/20/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 07/20/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Greg Connor, 07/20/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 07/20/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Greg Connor, 07/19/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 06/20/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 06/20/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Terry Fielder, 06/19/2005
Re: Interesting CAM SPAM court case as it relates to 2821 vs 2822, Hector Santos, 06/17/2005
RE: Interesting CAM SPAM court case as it relates to 2821 vs 2822, John Glube, 06/17/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 06/17/2005
Re: FYI: Interesting CAM SPAM court case as it relates to 2821 vs 2822, Michael Hammer, 06/17/2005
FYI: Interesting CAM SPAM court case as it relates to 2821 vs 2822, Hector Santos, 06/17/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, william(at)elan.net, 06/16/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, Ted Hardie, 06/16/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID - for your comments Chuck, johnp, 06/16/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, william(at)elan.net, 06/16/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, Ted Hardie, 06/16/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, Frank Ellermann, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Terry Fielder, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Dean Anderson, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, william(at)elan.net, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, wayne, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Frank Ellermann, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Hector Santos, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, wayne, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Michael Hammer, 06/15/2005
Re: [spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Douglas Otis, 06/15/2005
[spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Frank Ellermann, 06/15/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/10/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/10/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, wayne, 06/10/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/10/2005
Paper on Path and Cryptographic Authentication Technologies, william(at)elan.net, 06/10/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, wayne, 06/09/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions (was Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt ), Douglas Otis, 06/09/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions, Frank Ellermann, 06/09/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/09/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions (was Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt ), Alan DeKok, 06/09/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions, Alan DeKok, 06/09/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/09/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions, Frank Ellermann, 06/09/2005
RE: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, Mark, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, wayne, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, Aredridel, 06/08/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions, Alan DeKok, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/08/2005
draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/08/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/07/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions (was Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt ), Douglas Otis, 06/07/2005
draft-schlitt-spf-classic-02 (was: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt), Frank Ellermann, 06/07/2005
Re: Philosophical discussions, Frank Ellermann, 06/07/2005
Philosophical discussions (was Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt ), Alan DeKok, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/07/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/06/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/06/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/04/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Dean Anderson, 06/04/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/04/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Frank Ellermann, 06/03/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/03/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/03/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/03/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/03/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/02/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, johnp, 06/02/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Graham Murray, 06/02/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 06/01/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 06/01/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, william(at)elan.net, 06/01/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/31/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Hector Santos, 05/31/2005
Re: Resent- header fields, Douglas Otis, 05/31/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/31/2005
[spf-help] Re: SPF and SenderID, Frank Ellermann, 05/31/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Graham Murray, 05/31/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/29/2005
Re: Resent- header fields, william(at)elan.net, 05/29/2005
Resent- header fields, william(at)elan.net, 05/29/2005
Re: SPF PASS, Frank Ellermann, 05/29/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Hector Santos, 05/27/2005
RE: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 05/27/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Terry Fielder, 05/27/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 05/27/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/27/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Alan DeKok, 05/27/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/27/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Terry Fielder, 05/27/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/26/2005
RE: Addressing Backward Compatibility [was Re: SPF PASS], John Glube, 05/26/2005
Re: draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Julian Mehnle, 05/26/2005
overall HELO FAIL (was: SPF PASS), Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Carl Hutzler, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and SenderID, Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
RE: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Scott Kitterman, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, wayne, 05/26/2005
RE: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, Sauer, Damon, 05/26/2005
Re: Addressing Backward Compatibility [was Re: SPF PASS], Carl Hutzler, 05/26/2005
draft-schlitt-spf-classic-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", wayne, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, wayne, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
HELO and MAIL FROM are separate identities; reputation on a per-domain basis instead of per-IP (was: SPF PASS), Julian Mehnle, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, Julian Mehnle, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, Terry Fielder, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Terry Fielder, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, Terry Fielder, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, wayne, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
RE: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Mark, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, John L, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Richard Clayton, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, Terry Fielder, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed,please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Julian Mehnle, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, william(at)elan.net, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, Terry Fielder, 05/26/2005
RE: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Mark, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Julian Mehnle, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Julian Mehnle, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, John L, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), wayne, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS, Terry Fielder, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, Terry Fielder, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), wayne, 05/26/2005
Addressing Backward Compatibility [was Re: SPF PASS], Hector Santos, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Tony Finch, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", wayne, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed,please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", wayne, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), John Levine, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), John Levine, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), wayne, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), william(at)elan.net, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Richard Clayton, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), william(at)elan.net, 05/26/2005
SPF and HELO, was Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Tony Finch, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Carl Hutzler, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), william(at)elan.net, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed,please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Carl Hutzler, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Andrew Newton, 05/26/2005
RE: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed,please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Mark, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Arnt Gulbrandsen, 05/26/2005
RE: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Mark, 05/26/2005
RE: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http: //www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Sauer, Damon, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS, Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
RE: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundam entally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Sukhenko, Alex, 05/26/2005
Re: SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Carl Hutzler, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Carl Hutzler, 05/26/2005
SPF PASS (was: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/"), Frank Ellermann, 05/26/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", william(at)elan.net, 05/25/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http: //www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", John Levine, 05/25/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", wayne, 05/25/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Carl Hutzler, 05/25/2005
Re: "If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Julian Mehnle, 05/25/2005
"If you believe that the SPF concept is fundamentally flawed, please subscribe at http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/", Douglas Otis, 05/25/2005
draft-lyon-senderid-core-01.txt, Douglas Otis, 05/20/2005
Re: MARID back from the grave?, Harald Tveit Alvestrand, 02/22/2005
Re: MARID back from the grave?, Dave Crocker, 02/22/2005
Re: MARID back from the grave?, Dave Crocker, 02/21/2005
Re: MARID back from the grave?, Harald Tveit Alvestrand, 02/21/2005
MARID back from the grave?, Stephane Bortzmeyer, 02/21/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 02/02/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Hector Santos, 02/02/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Frank Ellermann, 02/02/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 02/01/2005
Re: Using DK/IIM [was: Re: So here it is one year later...], Jim Fenton, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., mxcomp, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Hector Santos, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 02/01/2005
Using DK/IIM [was: Re: So here it is one year later...], Hector Santos, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Jim Fenton, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Hector Santos, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Hector Santos, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., David Woodhouse, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., David Woodhouse, 02/01/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/31/2005
RE: So here it is one year later..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., william(at)elan.net, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Hector Santos, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Hector Santos, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Hector Santos, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Alan DeKok, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Jim Fenton, 01/31/2005
RE: So here it is one year later..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Alan DeKok, 01/31/2005
RE: So here it is one year later..., Hallam-Baker, Phillip, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., K.F.J. Martens, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., David Woodhouse, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Ian Rogers, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Frank Ellermann, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., gmc, 01/31/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/30/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Frank Ellermann, 01/30/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Frank Ellermann, 01/30/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Alan DeKok, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., william(at)elan.net, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Alan DeKok, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Andrew Newton, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Frank Ellermann, 01/29/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/28/2005
RE: So here it is one year later..., Gordon Fecyk, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Andrew Newton, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Justin Mason, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Justin Mason, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Justin Mason, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/28/2005
RE: [So... what gives?] RE: So here it is one year later..., Scott Kitterman, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., wayne, 01/28/2005
[So... what gives?] RE: So here it is one year later..., Gordon Fecyk, 01/28/2005
Re: Abusive blacklist, Dean Anderson, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Justin Mason, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., gmc, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/28/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Frank Ellermann, 01/27/2005
RE: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/27/2005
Re: Abusive blacklist, Dean Anderson, 01/27/2005
RE: So here it is one year later..., terry, 01/27/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Dean Anderson, 01/27/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/27/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Frank Ellermann, 01/27/2005
Re: So here it is one year later..., Douglas Otis, 01/27/2005
So here it is one year later..., Gordon Fecyk, 01/27/2005
DEA Directorate, william(at)elan.net, 01/19/2005
Re: Abusive blacklist, william(at)elan.net, 01/11/2005
Re: Abusive blacklist, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 01/11/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 01/11/2005
Abusive blacklist, Dean Anderson, 01/11/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Matthew.van.Eerde, 01/10/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 01/10/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], terry, 01/10/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Matthew.van.Eerde, 01/10/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Matthew.van.Eerde, 01/10/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 01/10/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], terry, 01/09/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 01/09/2005
Email Security Glossary, william(at)elan.net, 01/07/2005
Re: Source routing -- why not?, Chip Mefford, 01/05/2005
RE: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Matthew.van.Eerde, 01/03/2005
Approaches to system design - Marketing vs Security and why MASG should not be standards group (was: [spf-discuss] Re: MAAWG whitepaper draft), william(at)elan.net, 12/13/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/12/2004
Re: Do not spoof me, David Woodhouse, 12/10/2004
Re: Do not spoof me, Douglas Otis, 12/09/2004
Re: Do not spoof me, Frank Ellermann, 12/09/2004
Do not spoof me, Douglas Otis, 12/09/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alex van den Bogaerdt, 12/09/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/09/2004
Re: blowback, Frank Ellermann, 12/09/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alex van den Bogaerdt, 12/09/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], John Levine, 12/08/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/08/2004
Re: Bounce handling, David Woodhouse, 12/08/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/08/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alex van den Bogaerdt, 12/08/2004
Re: Bounce handling, David Woodhouse, 12/08/2004
Bounce handling, Douglas Otis, 12/08/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Matthew Elvey, 12/08/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/08/2004
Re: blowback, was A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], John Levine, 12/08/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/08/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Chris Haynes, 12/08/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/08/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Chris Haynes, 12/08/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Mark Shewmaker, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Dean Anderson, 12/07/2004
Re: CSV BATV (CLEAR) DK IIM (MASS), Douglas Otis, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/07/2004
Re: CSV BATV (CLEAR) DK IIM (MASS), Douglas Otis, 12/07/2004
Re: CSV BATV (CLEAR) DK IIM (MASS), David Woodhouse, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/07/2004
Re: CSV BATV (CLEAR) DK IIM (MASS), Dave Crocker, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/07/2004
CSV BATV (CLEAR) DK IIM (MASS), Douglas Otis, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Alan DeKok, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], David Woodhouse, 12/07/2004
Re: A new SMTP "3821" [Re: FTC stuff...........], Hector Santos, 12/06/2004

Page 1 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.