Archive of ietf-smtp, by date

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

Page 2 of 11
[Prev Page] [Next Page] [First Page] [Last Page]

Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Dave Crocker, 05/19/2008
smarthosts, Tony Finch, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/19/2008
Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Dave Crocker, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV doesn't fix forwarding, Alessandro Vesely, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Hector Santos, 05/19/2008
Re: SMTP metadata transfer, Alexey Melnikov, 05/19/2008
Re: SMTP metadata transfer, Tony Finch, 05/19/2008
Re: SMTP metadata transfer, Alexey Melnikov, 05/19/2008
Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Paul Smith, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Tony Finch, 05/19/2008
Re: private key BATV is useful, Paul Smith, 05/19/2008
Re: SMTP metadata transfer, Tony Finch, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Jeff Macdonald, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, John Levine, 05/19/2008
Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Tony Hansen, 05/19/2008
Re: private key BATV is useful, John R Levine, 05/19/2008
SMTP metadata transfer, Paul Smith, 05/19/2008
Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Paul Smith, 05/19/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Alessandro Vesely, 05/19/2008
Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Alessandro Vesely, 05/19/2008
Re: public key BATV isn't useful, John Levine, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Dave Crocker, 05/18/2008
Re: Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, John C Klensin, 05/18/2008
Re: Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, Dave Crocker, 05/18/2008
Re: Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, John C Klensin, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, John Levine, 05/18/2008
Re: Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, Tony Hansen, 05/18/2008
Re: Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, SM, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Steve Atkins, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, John Levine, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, mouss, 05/18/2008
Re: Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, Alessandro Vesely, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/18/2008
Re: Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, Bill McQuillan, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, SM, 05/18/2008
Specification "NOTE" paragraphs and normative language, Dave Crocker, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Peter J. Holzer, 05/18/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Dave Crocker, 05/17/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, John R Levine, 05/17/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/17/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, John R Levine, 05/17/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/17/2008
Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, John Levine, 05/17/2008
RE: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Dan Wing, 05/17/2008
BATV pseudo-Last Call, Dave Crocker, 05/16/2008
Preferred Originator, Santoshkumar K S, 05/15/2008
Re: Additional parameters to SMTP commands, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 05/14/2008
Re: Additional parameters to SMTP commands, John C Klensin, 05/14/2008
Additional parameters to SMTP commands, Santoshkumar K S, 05/14/2008
Re: MX lookup error handling change, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 05/08/2008
Re: MX lookup error handling change, Tony Finch, 05/08/2008
Re: MX lookup error handling change, SM, 05/08/2008
Re: MX lookup error handling change, Tony Finch, 05/08/2008
Re: MX lookup error handling change, Robert A. Rosenberg, 05/08/2008
Re: MX lookup error handling change, Hector Santos, 05/08/2008
MX lookup error handling change, Tony Finch, 05/08/2008
Forwarding in SMTP, Santoshkumar K S, 05/08/2008
Re: SPF instead of MX? was:Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Douglas Otis, 05/06/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Frank Ellermann, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Douglas Otis, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Hector Santos, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Hector Santos, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Douglas Otis, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Frank Ellermann, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Alessandro Vesely, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Douglas Otis, 05/05/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 05/04/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Frank Ellermann, 05/03/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, John Leslie, 05/03/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 05/02/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Douglas Otis, 05/02/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Hector Santos, 05/02/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Frank Ellermann, 04/30/2008
Re: Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, John Leslie, 04/30/2008
Queued Mail or Unreturnable Mail?, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 04/30/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Alessandro Vesely, 04/26/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Frank Ellermann, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Douglas Otis, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Alessandro Vesely, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Frank Ellermann, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Peter J. Holzer, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Paul Smith, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Paul Smith, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/25/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/24/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/24/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Peter J. Holzer, 04/24/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/24/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/23/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Hector Santos, 04/21/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Keith Moore, 04/21/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 04/21/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 04/21/2008
IPv6 considerations (was: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), Frank Ellermann, 04/19/2008
Interesting Thread regarding unexpected MX lookups., Hector Santos, 04/19/2008
Sheep look up (was: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), Frank Ellermann, 04/19/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/19/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Willie Gillespie, 04/18/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Douglas Otis, 04/18/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/18/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/18/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Lisa Dusseault, 04/18/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/18/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Paul Smith, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, SM, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, John Leslie, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/17/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Hector Santos, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/17/2008
Re: IPv6 addresses and IPv4 hosts, Hector Santos, 04/17/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Keith Moore, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/17/2008
Re: IPv6 addresses and IPv4 hosts, John C Klensin, 04/17/2008
Re: IPv6 addresses and IPv4 hosts (was: Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), John Leslie, 04/17/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Dave Crocker, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/17/2008
Re: IPv6 addresses and IPv4 hosts, Hector Santos, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, John C Klensin, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/17/2008
Re: IPv6 addresses and IPv4 hosts (was: Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, John C Klensin, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, John C Klensin, 04/17/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/17/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Paul Smith, 04/17/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Henning Schulzrinne, 04/16/2008
Re: Block IPv6-only at the border, Frank Ellermann, 04/16/2008
Re: Block IPv6-only at the border (was: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), John C Klensin, 04/16/2008
Re: Block IPv6-only at the border (was: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 04/16/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, John C Klensin, 04/16/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Willie Gillespie, 04/16/2008
Block IPv6-only at the border (was: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), Frank Ellermann, 04/16/2008
IPv4 / IPv6 interaction, John Leslie, 04/16/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, John Leslie, 04/16/2008
IPv6 addresses and IPv4 hosts (was: Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt), John C Klensin, 04/16/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/16/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, ned+ietf-smtp, 04/16/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Finch, 04/16/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-10 S5.1 Revision: "Unusable" MXs, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/15/2008
RFC2821bis-10 S5.1 Revision: "Unusable" MXs, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 04/15/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Douglas Otis, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, John Leslie, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Keith Moore, 04/15/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Lisa Dusseault, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Hector Santos, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, SM, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, SM, 04/15/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Hector Santos, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/15/2008
Re: I-D Action:draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10.txt, Tony Hansen, 04/15/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Peter Bowyer, 04/15/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Hector Santos, 04/15/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Carl S. Gutekunst, 04/14/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Keith Moore, 04/14/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/14/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/14/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Dave Crocker, 04/14/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis: closing the implicit MX issue, Tony Hansen, 04/14/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, Frank Ellermann, 04/14/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, ned+ietf-smtp, 04/14/2008
Re: Do domains in SMTP have to exist ?, Tony Finch, 04/14/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Hector Santos, 04/14/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, Hector Santos, 04/13/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Hector Santos, 04/13/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, Frank Ellermann, 04/13/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, John C Klensin, 04/12/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Frank Ellermann, 04/12/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, Frank Ellermann, 04/12/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 04/12/2008
Re: RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, John C Klensin, 04/12/2008
Re: Do domains in SMTP have to exist ?, Dave Crocker, 04/12/2008
Re: Do domains in SMTP have to exist ?, John Leslie, 04/12/2008
RFC2821bis-09: Lines and Submission, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 04/12/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 04/12/2008
Re: Do domains in SMTP have to exist ?, John C Klensin, 04/12/2008
Re: Do domains in SMTP have to exist ?, SM, 04/12/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, Carl S. Gutekunst, 04/12/2008
Do domains in SMTP have to exist ?, John Levine, 04/12/2008
Re: Requiring PTR, SM, 04/12/2008
Requiring PTR, Hector Santos, 04/12/2008
Re: Mixed Return Codes, Frank Ellermann, 04/11/2008
RE: Mixed Return Codes, MH Michael Hammer (5304), 04/11/2008
Re: Mixed Return Codes - CORECTION, Hector Santos, 04/11/2008
Mixed Return Codes, Hector Santos, 04/11/2008
SMTP Service Advertisement, John Leslie, 04/11/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, John C Klensin, 04/11/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/10/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Frank Ellermann, 04/09/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, John C Klensin, 04/09/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/09/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/09/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Russ Allbery, 04/08/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/08/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Douglas Otis, 04/08/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Pete Resnick, 04/08/2008
Re: IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP), John C Klensin, 04/08/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/08/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Hector Santos, 04/08/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Michael Storz, 04/08/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Russ Allbery, 04/07/2008
Re: IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP), Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Douglas Otis, 04/07/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Glenn Anderson, 04/07/2008
Re: IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP), Hector Santos, 04/07/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Hector Santos, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Mark Andrews, 04/07/2008
Re: IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP), Frank Ellermann, 04/07/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Pete Resnick, 04/07/2008
Re: Implicit MX decisions, John C Klensin, 04/07/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, John C Klensin, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
Re: Implicit MX decisions, Hector Santos, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
Re: What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Hector Santos, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/07/2008
Lost DSNs (was: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?), Frank Ellermann, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
What is the history of 2821 and implict MX?, Pete Resnick, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, ned+ietf-smtp, 04/07/2008
Re: IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP), Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Dave Crocker, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Dave Crocker, 04/07/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, John C Klensin, 04/07/2008
Re: IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP), Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Alessandro Vesely, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Hector Santos, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Hector Santos, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Michael Storz, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Michael Storz, 04/07/2008
Re: deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Dave Crocker, 04/07/2008
deprecate implicit MX even for IPv4, Michael Storz, 04/07/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: Implicit MX decisions, Dave Crocker, 04/06/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/06/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/06/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/06/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/06/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/06/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/06/2008
IPV6: Where are we? (SMTP), Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/06/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Michael Storz, 04/06/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/06/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/06/2008
IPV6 Implementations Reports, Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/06/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Russ Allbery, 04/05/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Hector Santos, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/05/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/05/2008
Re: How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/05/2008
Re: Why implicit MX is a bad idea for IPv6, Mark Andrews, 04/05/2008
Implicit MX decisions, John C Klensin, 04/05/2008
Re: Why implicit MX is a bad idea for IPv6, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Russ Allbery, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Peter J. Holzer, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Peter J. Holzer, 04/05/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Peter J. Holzer, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Peter J. Holzer, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Peter J. Holzer, 04/05/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Bill McQuillan, 04/05/2008
Re: Why implicit MX is a bad idea for IPv6, Peter J. Holzer, 04/05/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Tony Finch, 04/05/2008
How does SMTP IPv4 and IPv6 work together, Hector Santos, 04/05/2008
Why implicit MX is a bad idea for IPv6, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Michael Storz, 04/05/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John C Klensin, 04/05/2008
Implicit MXs - asking the question more clearly (was: Re: Scope Creep), John C Klensin, 04/05/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, John Levine, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Mark Andrews, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Michael Storz, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, John C Klensin, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Peter J. Holzer, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, SM, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Peter J. Holzer, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Michael Storz, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Bill McQuillan, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Paul Hoffman, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Dave Crocker, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, John Levine, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Dave Crocker, 04/04/2008
Re: There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Willie Gillespie, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Tony Hansen, 04/04/2008
There is at least one email server without MX RR but AAAA RR we all know, Michael Storz, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Tony Hansen, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Dave Crocker, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Hector Santos, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Michael Storz, 04/04/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Frank Ellermann, 04/04/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Paul Smith, 04/04/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Keith Moore, 04/03/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Peter J. Holzer, 04/03/2008
Re: current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Mark Andrews, 04/03/2008
current usage of AAAA implicit MX?, Tony Hansen, 04/03/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Hector Santos, 04/03/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Bill McQuillan, 04/03/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Michael Storz, 04/03/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Keith Moore, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Lisa Dusseault, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Dave Crocker, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, SM, 04/02/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, John C Klensin, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, John C Klensin, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, John C Klensin, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Lisa Dusseault, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, ned+ietf-smtp, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, ned+ietf-smtp, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Dave Crocker, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Dave Crocker, 04/02/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Dave Crocker, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Keith Moore, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Dave Crocker, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Michael Storz, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Keith Moore, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Keith Moore, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Michael Storz, 04/02/2008
Re: Registration model, 2821bis-06, Derek J. Balling, 04/02/2008
Registration model, 2821bis-06, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/02/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Alessandro Vesely, 04/02/2008
outdated thinking about domains and hosts, Keith Moore, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Robert A. Rosenberg, 04/01/2008
Re: Scope Creep, John Leslie, 04/01/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 04/01/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Dave Crocker, 04/01/2008
Re: nullmx, ned+ietf-smtp, 04/01/2008
Re: Scope Creep, John Leslie, 04/01/2008
Re: nullmx, Frank Ellermann, 04/01/2008
Re: Scope Creep, Dave Crocker, 04/01/2008
Scope Creep, John Leslie, 04/01/2008
Re: dual-stack IP transition, Dave Crocker, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Dave Crocker, 04/01/2008
dual-stack IP transition, John Leslie, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Paul Smith, 04/01/2008
The Actual Difference, John Leslie, 04/01/2008
Re: nullmx, ned+ietf-smtp, 04/01/2008
Re: nullmx, Hector Santos, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Keith Moore, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/01/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 04/01/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Robert A. Rosenberg, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Dave Crocker, 03/31/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, Frank Ellermann, 03/31/2008
Re: dual-stack IP transition is not specific to SMTP, Keith Moore, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John C Klensin, 03/31/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, Keith Moore, 03/31/2008
Re: nullmx, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/31/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, Dave Crocker, 03/31/2008
Re: nullmx, Frank Ellermann, 03/31/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/31/2008
Re: nullmx, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John R Levine, 03/31/2008
Re: nullmx, Frank Ellermann, 03/31/2008
dual-stack IP transition is not specific to SMTP, Dave Crocker, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John Levine, 03/31/2008
Re: nullmx (was: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis), Mark Andrews, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, Willie Gillespie, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, SM, 03/31/2008
Looking for good mail vs. looking for bad mail, John Levine, 03/31/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail for IPv6-only hosts, SM, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Hector Santos, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/31/2008
nullmx (was: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis), Frank Ellermann, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Frank Ellermann, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Frank Ellermann, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, Paul Smith, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 03/31/2008
Defaulting to no mail for IPv6-only hosts, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 03/31/2008
Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, SM, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, Russ Allbery, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Mark Andrews, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Carl S. Gutekunst, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, Jim Fenton, 03/30/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis, Mark Andrews, 03/30/2008
Paradigm change?, John Leslie, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, Dave Crocker, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, John Leslie, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, Hector Santos, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, John C Klensin, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, John Leslie, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John C Klensin, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Carl S. Gutekunst, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, Dave Crocker, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, John C Klensin, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, John R Levine, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, Dave Crocker, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor is. It's not a pardigm change, John R Levine, 03/30/2008
Re: Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, Frank Ellermann, 03/30/2008
Minor isn't. It's a pardigm change, Dave Crocker, 03/30/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, John Levine, 03/30/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Russ Allbery, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, John R Levine, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/30/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 03/30/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Russ Allbery, 03/30/2008
Re: not delivering, and History of fallback to A, John R Levine, 03/30/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, Alex van den Bogaerdt, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, John Levine, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, Dave Crocker, 03/30/2008
Re: History of fallback to A, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/30/2008
Re: Defaulting to no mail, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 03/30/2008
History of fallback to A, John Levine, 03/29/2008
Defaulting to no mail, John Levine, 03/29/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs (on CNAME again), Mark Martinec, 03/28/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Mark Andrews, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/27/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Mark Andrews, 03/27/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs, Tony Finch, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Mark Andrews, 03/27/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs, John C Klensin, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, SM, 03/27/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs, SM, 03/27/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis, Tony Finch, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Frank Ellermann, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 03/27/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs, Matti Aarnio, 03/27/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Mark Andrews, 03/26/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Hector Santos, 03/26/2008
Re: How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, Mark Andrews, 03/26/2008
How to mark domains that do / do not wish to receive email, John Leslie, 03/26/2008
Re: Last Call: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis, Mark Andrews, 03/26/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs, SM, 03/26/2008
Re: Implicit MX and A RRs, Tony Hansen, 03/26/2008
resolving the last few items for 2821bis, Tony Hansen, 03/26/2008
Re: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-09, Tony Hansen, 03/21/2008
Re: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-09, Frank Ellermann, 03/21/2008
draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-09, John C Klensin, 03/20/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/14/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, Frank Ellermann, 03/13/2008
Re: email-arch -- Security Considerations, Tony Finch, 03/12/2008
Re: email-arch -- Security Considerations, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, Frank Ellermann, 03/11/2008
RE: email-arch -- Security Considerations, MH Michael Hammer (5304), 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- Security Considerations, Dave Crocker, 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, Frank Ellermann, 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, Dave Crocker, 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, ned+ietf-smtp, 03/11/2008
Re: email-arch -- comments solicited on I8N, Frank Ellermann, 03/11/2008

Page 2 of 11
[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.