Archive of ietf-smtp, by date

• Re: 5321 and 5322 are published!, Sabahattin Gucukoglu, 10/06/2008
• Re: 5321 and 5322 are published!, Keith Moore, 10/02/2008
• Re: 5321 and 5322 are published!, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 10/01/2008
• Re: 5321 and 5322 are published!, John C Klensin, 10/01/2008
• Re: 5321 and 5322 are published!, Hector Santos, 10/01/2008
• Re: 5321 and 5322 are published!, SM, 10/01/2008
• 5321 and 5322 are published!, Tony Hansen, 10/01/2008
• fyi re 2821bis and 2822upd, Tony Hansen, 09/21/2008
• [Fwd: Protocol Action: 'Internet Message Format' to Draft Standard], Tony Hansen, 08/26/2008
• Re: 2822upd approved, Tony Hansen, 08/20/2008
• Re: retry question, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 08/19/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/16/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), John C Klensin, 08/16/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/15/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/15/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/14/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Tony Finch, 08/14/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), John C Klensin, 08/13/2008
• DATA reply codes - which ones?, Hector Santos, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), John C Klensin, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Tony Hansen, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Bart Schaefer, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Frank Ellermann, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Tony Finch, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Frank Ellermann, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Tony Finch, 08/13/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/12/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), John C Klensin, 08/12/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Bart Schaefer, 08/12/2008
• Re: SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., Philip Guenther, 08/12/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), John C Klensin, 08/12/2008
• Re: Retry Strategies, John C Klensin, 08/12/2008
• Re: SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., Frank Ellermann, 08/12/2008
• Re: Retry Strategies, Paul Smith, 08/12/2008
• Re: SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., Hector Santos, 08/12/2008
• Retry Strategies, Hector Santos, 08/12/2008
• Re: SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., Frank Ellermann, 08/12/2008
• Re: SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., Philip Guenther, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Glenn Anderson, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), John R Levine, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Jeff Macdonald, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Alessandro Vesely, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), SM, 08/11/2008
• Signalling to retry RCPTs separately, John Leslie, 08/11/2008
• Re: retry question, Tony Finch, 08/11/2008
• retries redux? was Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Tony Finch, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), SM, 08/11/2008
• Re: retry question, Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), John Leslie, 08/11/2008
• Re: SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., SM, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Tony Finch, 08/11/2008
• Re: retry question, Tony Finch, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Hector Santos, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Hector Santos, 08/11/2008
• Re: SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., Frank Ellermann, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), Paul Smith, 08/11/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Alessandro Vesely, 08/11/2008
• SendMail follows a NO RETRY 5yz logic as defined by specs., Hector Santos, 08/11/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: Retry question, Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?), Frank Ellermann, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), Dave Crocker, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), John C Klensin, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), Glenn Anderson, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/10/2008
• Re: Retry question, Tony Finch, 08/10/2008
• Re: Retry question, Pete Resnick, 08/10/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/10/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/10/2008
• Re: Retry question, Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/10/2008
• Re: Retry question, Pete Resnick, 08/10/2008
• Re: Retry question, Bill McQuillan, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/10/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., ned+ietf-smtp, 08/10/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: Retry question, Pete Resnick, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), Glenn Anderson, 08/10/2008
• 2821bis AUTH48 fix (?) (was: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis)), Frank Ellermann, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Glenn Anderson, 08/10/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Glenn Anderson, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/10/2008
• Re: DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., ned+ietf-smtp, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Glenn Anderson, 08/10/2008
• DATA 554 responses - To Retry or Not., Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), John C Klensin, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Glenn Anderson, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Glenn Anderson, 08/10/2008
• Re: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), Hector Santos, 08/10/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Glenn Anderson, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), Bill McQuillan, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• 2821 5yz Typo - Client Retry Gaffe (fixed in 2821bis), Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Glenn Anderson, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: Pipelining the DATA Command, ned+ietf-smtp, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/09/2008
• Re: Pipelining the DATA Command, Glenn Anderson, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, ned+ietf-smtp, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Robert A. Rosenberg, 08/09/2008
• Pipelining the DATA Command, Robert A. Rosenberg, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Glenn Anderson, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Frank Ellermann, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Robert A. Rosenberg, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Robert A. Rosenberg, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Frank Ellermann, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, John C Klensin, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Paul Smith, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, ned+ietf-smtp, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Frank Ellermann, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Tony Finch, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, John Leslie, 08/09/2008
• Re: Improved straw man for retry scenarios, Frank Ellermann, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question (was: 2821bis/ter and procedures), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, ned+ietf-smtp, 08/09/2008
• Improved straw man for retry scenarios, John Levine, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Frank Ellermann, 08/09/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/09/2008
• retry question (was: 2821bis/ter and procedures), SM, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Richard Kay, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Alex van den Bogaerdt, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Alex van den Bogaerdt, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Alex van den Bogaerdt, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Alex van den Bogaerdt, 08/09/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Hector Santos, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Hector Santos, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), SM, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), SM, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Hector Santos, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Hector Santos, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), SM, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Hector Santos, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Hector Santos, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Tony Finch, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Frank Ellermann, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Tony Finch, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), John R Levine, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Tony Finch, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Tony Finch, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures, Paul Smith, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Paul Smith, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), ned+ietf-smtp, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), John R Levine, 08/08/2008
• Re: Forwarding in the face of spam, Keith Moore, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), Richard Kay, 08/08/2008
• Forwarding in the face of spam, Alessandro Vesely, 08/08/2008
• Re: 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), John Levine, 08/07/2008
• 2821bis/ter and procedures (was: Re: retry question), John C Klensin, 08/07/2008
• Re: retry question, Tony Finch, 08/07/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/07/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/06/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/06/2008
• Re: retry question, Tony Finch, 08/06/2008
• Re: retry question, ned+ietf-smtp, 08/06/2008
• Re: retry question, Tony Finch, 08/06/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/06/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/06/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, ned+ietf-smtp, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, Hector Santos, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, Tony Finch, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, ned+ietf-smtp, 08/05/2008
• Re: retry question, SM, 08/05/2008
• retry question, Tony Finch, 08/05/2008
• mini BOF on mail standard maintenance, Tony Hansen, 07/29/2008
• Re: Approved (was: Unsticking rfc2821bis), John C Klensin, 07/22/2008
• FWD: ID Tracker State Update Notice: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis, John C Klensin, 07/22/2008
• Approved (was: Unsticking rfc2821bis), Frank Ellermann, 07/22/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/20/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, SM, 07/19/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, ned+ietf-smtp, 07/19/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/19/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, ned+ietf-smtp, 07/19/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, SM, 07/19/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Dave Crocker, 07/19/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Lisa Dusseault, 07/19/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, SM, 07/18/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Dave Crocker, 07/18/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Lisa Dusseault, 07/18/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/18/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Dave Crocker, 07/18/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, John C Klensin, 07/18/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, SM, 07/18/2008
• Who standardizes the standardization process? (was: Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis), Alessandro Vesely, 07/18/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/17/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Dave Crocker, 07/17/2008
• Re: Unsticking rfc2821bis, Tony Hansen, 07/17/2008
• Unsticking rfc2821bis, John C Klensin, 07/17/2008
• Re: rfc2821bis-11 posted -- contents and status report, John C Klensin, 07/11/2008
• Re: rfc2821bis-11 posted -- contents and status report, SM, 07/11/2008
• Re: rfc2821bis-11 posted -- contents and status report, John C Klensin, 07/11/2008
• Re: rfc2821bis-11 posted -- contents and status report, Tony Hansen, 07/11/2008
• rfc2821bis-11 posted -- contents and status report, John C Klensin, 07/11/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis, SM, 07/10/2008
• Re: Auto-Submitted and Autosubmitted, Frank Ellermann, 07/10/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), Chris Newman, 07/09/2008
• Re: Auto-Submitted and Autosubmitted, Pete Resnick, 07/09/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Chris Newman, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), ned+ietf-smtp, 07/09/2008
• Re: Auto-Submitted and Autosubmitted, ned+ietf-smtp, 07/09/2008
• Auto-Submitted and Autosubmitted, =?utf-8?b?0JTQuNC70Y/QvSDQn9Cw0LvQsNGD0LfQvtCy?=, 07/09/2008
• Re: I-D Action:draft-hathcock-minger-05.txt, Frank Ellermann, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), John C Klensin, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), SM, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis, John C Klensin, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), John C Klensin, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), John C Klensin, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), John Leslie, 07/09/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Tony Finch, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), SM, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), Pete Resnick, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis, Keith Moore, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis, John C Klensin, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis, Keith Moore, 07/09/2008
• Re: More new text for 2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/09/2008
• More new text for 2821bis (was: Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008), John C Klensin, 07/08/2008
• Re: IESG response fixes for 2821bis, SM, 07/08/2008
• Re: IESG response fixes for 2821bis, Tony Hansen, 07/08/2008
• Re: borderline offtopic about examples, Frank Ellermann, 07/08/2008
• Re: borderline offtopic about examples, SM, 07/08/2008
• Re: borderline offtopic about examples, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Cyrus Daboo, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Francesco Gennai, 07/08/2008
• Re: IESG response fixes for 2821bis, Tony Hansen, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Francesco Gennai, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, John Leslie, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Alexey Melnikov, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Keith Moore, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Alessandro Vesely, 07/08/2008
• Re: borderline offtopic about examples, Frank Ellermann, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Steve Atkins, 07/08/2008
• Re: IESG response fixes for 2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/08/2008
• Re: borderline offtopic about examples, John C Klensin, 07/08/2008
• Re: IESG response fixes for 2821bis, John C Klensin, 07/08/2008
• borderline offtopic about examples, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 07/08/2008
• Re: IESG response fixes for 2821bis, Magnus Westerlund, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Hector Santos, 07/08/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 07/08/2008
• Re: IESG response fixes for 2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 07/07/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, SM, 07/07/2008
• IESG response fixes for 2821bis, Tony Hansen, 07/07/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Keld Jørn Simonsen, 07/07/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Dave Crocker, 07/07/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, ned+ietf-smtp, 07/07/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Jim Fenton, 07/07/2008
• Re: Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, Tony Hansen, 07/07/2008
• Response to appeal from John Klensin dated 13-Jun-2008, IESG Secretary, 07/07/2008
• Re: Standardized tag (was: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss), SM, 07/04/2008
• Re: Standardized tag (was: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss), John C Klensin, 07/03/2008
• Re: Standardized tag (was: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss), John Leslie, 07/03/2008
• Re: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss, John C Klensin, 07/03/2008
• Re: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss, Magnus Westerlund, 07/03/2008
• Standardized tag (was: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss), SM, 07/01/2008
• Re: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss, John C Klensin, 07/01/2008
• draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss, Magnus Westerlund, 07/01/2008
• Re: draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss, Frank Ellermann, 06/30/2008
• draft-klensin-rfc2821bis-10: ABNF discuss, Magnus Westerlund, 06/30/2008
• An interesting proposal for SMTP, 'Stephane Bortzmeyer', 06/29/2008
• Re: name and filename parameters, Francesco Gennai, 06/23/2008
• Re: name and filename parameters, ned+ietf-smtp, 06/21/2008
• Re: name and filename parameters, Keith Moore, 06/21/2008
• name and filename parameters, Francesco Gennai, 06/21/2008
• Re: Handling of Missing Required Fields, Hector Santos, 06/12/2008
• Re: Handling of Missing Required Fields, Pete Resnick, 06/12/2008
• Re: Handling of Missing Required Fields, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 06/12/2008
• Re: Handling of Missing Required Fields, Pete Resnick, 06/10/2008
• Re: Handling of Missing Required Fields, SM, 06/10/2008
• Handling of Missing Required Fields, Hector Santos, 06/09/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Lisa Dusseault, 06/09/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Keith Moore, 06/09/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, John C Klensin, 06/09/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Lisa Dusseault, 06/09/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Pete Resnick, 06/06/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Keith Moore, 06/06/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Pete Resnick, 06/06/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, John C Klensin, 06/06/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, John Leslie, 06/06/2008
• New 2606bis draft (was: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis), Frank Ellermann, 06/05/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, SM, 06/05/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Frank Ellermann, 06/05/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 06/05/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Keith Moore, 06/05/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Keith Moore, 06/05/2008
• Re: IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, Dave Crocker, 06/05/2008
• IESG approval status of rfc2821bis, John C Klensin, 06/05/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/28/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/27/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Tony Finch, 05/27/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Paul Smith, 05/27/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Tony Finch, 05/27/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Paul Smith, 05/27/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Bill McQuillan, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Robert A. Rosenberg, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Robert A. Rosenberg, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Hector Santos, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, John Levine, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, John Levine, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Tony Finch, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Arnt Gulbrandsen, 05/26/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Alessandro Vesely, 05/25/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Tony Finch, 05/25/2008
• Re: private key BATV is useful, mouss, 05/25/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/25/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/25/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Hector Santos, 05/25/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, John C Klensin, 05/25/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, John Levine, 05/25/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, SM, 05/24/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/24/2008
• Re: Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, John C Klensin, 05/23/2008
• Proposal for Adjusted DATA Timeout, Hector Santos, 05/23/2008
• Re: Existing email address meta-syntax standards, especially GSTN, Douglas Otis, 05/22/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/22/2008
• Re: Existing email address meta-syntax standards, especially GSTN, John Levine, 05/22/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Peter J. Holzer, 05/22/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Tony Hansen, 05/22/2008
• Re: Mailing Lists v. BATV, Peter J. Holzer, 05/22/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 05/22/2008
• Mailing Lists v. BATV, John Leslie, 05/22/2008
• Re: Lose the time stamp in BATV, Peter J. Holzer, 05/22/2008
• Re: Existing email address meta-syntax standards, especially GSTN, Douglas Otis, 05/22/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Alessandro Vesely, 05/22/2008
• Re: Existing email address meta-syntax standards, especially GSTN, Douglas Otis, 05/21/2008
• Re: vacation programs, was BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, mouss, 05/21/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Dave Crocker, 05/21/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Philip Guenther, 05/21/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Robert A. Rosenberg, 05/21/2008
• Existing email address meta-syntax standards, especially GSTN, Dave Crocker, 05/21/2008
• Re: vacation programs, was BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/21/2008
• Re: vacation programs, was BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Philip Guenther, 05/20/2008
• Re: remote signing, was BATV pseudo-Last Call, John R Levine, 05/20/2008
• Re: vacation programs, was BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, John R Levine, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: remote signing, was BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: remote signing, Frank Ellermann, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Frank Ellermann, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Philip Guenther, 05/20/2008
• Re: remote signing, was BATV pseudo-Last Call, John R Levine, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, John Levine, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: remote signing, was BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Frank Ellermann, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Frank Ellermann, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Frank Ellermann, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Frank Ellermann, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Douglas Otis, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, John Levine, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: remote signing, was BATV pseudo-Last Call, John Levine, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Tony Finch, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Tony Hansen, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Douglas Otis, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, John Leslie, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Carl S. Gutekunst, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Tony Finch, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV breaks rfc2821bis?, Alessandro Vesely, 05/20/2008
• Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Douglas Otis, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Tony Finch, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• BATV smtp extension, Dave Crocker, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Tony Finch, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, ned+ietf-smtp, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Paul Smith, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, mouss, 05/20/2008
• Re: SMTP metadata transfer, Paul Smith, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Paul Smith, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, SM, 05/20/2008
• Re: Lose the time stamp in BATV, Paul Smith, 05/20/2008
• Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Paul Smith, 05/20/2008
• Re: public key BATV isn't useful, Paul Smith, 05/20/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Alessandro Vesely, 05/20/2008
• Re: Lose the time stamp in BATV, Carl S. Gutekunst, 05/19/2008
• Lose the time stamp in BATV, John R Levine, 05/19/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Tony Hansen, 05/19/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, John Levine, 05/19/2008
• Re: BATV pseudo-Last Call, Dave Crocker, 05/19/2008
• Re: private key BATV is useful, John R Levine, 05/19/2008
• Re: private key BATV is useful, mouss, 05/19/2008
• 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

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.