Archive of ietf-mxcomp, by thread

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

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.