Re: [Ietf-dkim] DKIM issues (tag "v=DKIM1", tag "p=")Re: [Ietf-dkim] DKIM issues (tag "v=DKIM1", tag "p=")
Dave Crocker
2023-06-14
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/Whxr4LF8RTMDiLHwmsuXYpGsbTs/
3318342
2065454
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signaturesRe: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures
Douglas Foster
2023-05-16
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/j_SWCu2EKxayw5r5OGXT0FhiWuQ/
3309499
2063669
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signaturesRe: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures
Hector Santos
2023-05-16
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/Cgbo6FoBPrwqDvzEukb74uVSd1k/
3309422
2063669
Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?
Michael Thomas
2020-12-04
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/oEs-tFcRdgezj0ef9QStLlCknZo/
2971903
1928541
Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?Re: [dmarc-ietf] is DMARC informational?
Dave Crocker
2020-12-04
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/dKMdBkRyunCrVM4o-29Kb94D_UM/
2971902
1928541
Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header FieldRe: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field
Dave Crocker
2020-07-14
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/DKhc3mqrXBIK-R_Sg0JanqQvPSU/
2904331
1903931
Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header FieldRe: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field
Hector Santos
2020-07-14
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/Nh6KeoKvg_SyLp4ftpEfotse2TQ/
2904290
1903931
Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header FieldRe: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Use of the RFC5322.Sender Header Field
Hector Santos
2020-07-14
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/hGMbgLvMf4MeVC3Ywf_HKJBX_Wg/
2904238
1903931
Re: [lamps] [Anima] on certification authorities.Re: [lamps] [Anima] on certification authorities.
Tim Hollebeek
2020-07-08
spasm
None
/arch/msg/spasm/zLMYjjQuwlvTPGq2lPyDOpnVEXQ/
2900994
1901208
Re: [lamps] [Anima] on certification authorities. (fwd) Carsten Bormann: Re: [Anima] on certification authorities.Re: [lamps] [Anima] on certification authorities. (fwd) Carsten Bormann: Re: [Anima] on certification authorities.
Michael Richardson
2020-06-28
spasm
None
/arch/msg/spasm/jNxnpX06M-QWAs4iWQtJjVncuPA/
2896488
1901359
Re: [lamps] [Anima] on certification authorities.Re: [lamps] [Anima] on certification authorities.
Erik Andersen
2020-06-28
spasm
None
/arch/msg/spasm/0MkJZ5N2rJP2VvndRQWhxfHPa-E/
2896446
1901208
Re: [Anima] [lamps] on certification authorities.Re: [Anima] [lamps] on certification authorities.
Carsten Bormann
2020-06-27
anima
None
/arch/msg/anima/q2aoS3ejBU206k68IUxHaVe-FaM/
2896370
1900831
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
Murray S. Kucherawy
2015-03-18
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/smPCsPbc9nWYQQTM6LRenNJK998/
1916301
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
t.petch
2015-03-17
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/_q3C1e4RM4aG-E5vuwQAiqDn7vM/
1915676
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
Scott Kitterman
2015-03-16
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/_za6k86OWBGn8Qn6nkiDn6UEps0/
1915408
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
Murray S. Kucherawy
2015-03-16
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/cFjjCy-kkw2mC0Xqn47-_MzccC0/
1915405
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
t.petch
2015-03-15
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/2I_XOppm480YSXGIIxi1quNN8js/
1914755
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
Murray S. Kucherawy
2015-03-15
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/0DWOTdHVGN4xyhbVkmVPY7sIIJw/
1914751
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
t.petch
2015-03-14
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/XfcATakBIALrOhFRtV_bfCw5K-M/
1914700
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
Murray S. Kucherawy
2015-03-12
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/5GwLQsszL3e8Lzm8QQb13XnWl4I/
1913846
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1Re: [apps-discuss] draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis s2.7.1
t.petch
2015-03-12
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/VjllGg49TyqN-OW-CV9qPKS3Ehc/
1913417
1071366
Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis-01.txtRe: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-rfc7001bis-01.txt
t.petch
2015-02-23
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/4W-fWL3l2FqpKXLAQj4XHlPGmv8/
1902300
1071388
Re: [dmarc-ietf] wiki vs. list?Re: [dmarc-ietf] wiki vs. list?
Hector Santos
2014-10-28
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/u48mya-zpjI-wQkL0rz5AfGRNYw/
1830807
1125746
Re: Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?Re: Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?
Hector Santos
2014-05-03
ietf
None
/arch/msg/ietf/KjQFxxo153MxaaDRi1xdvCL2zcs/
1719317
1340210
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?Re: [dmarc-ietf] Suggestion: can we test DEMARC deployment with a mailing list?
Hector Santos
2014-05-03
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/UUlzaGLnsxChNLmS_9_mCotaiH4/
1719318
1125800
Re: [apps-discuss] Status of "Spam reporting using IMAP: SREP" draftRe: [apps-discuss] Status of "Spam reporting using IMAP: SREP" draft
Alessandro Vesely
2012-07-02
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/IeXRlP_1J8oP1H_jWN7lQ4ow6o8/
195691
1072876
Re: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAPRe: [apps-discuss] Spam reporting over IMAP
Murray S. Kucherawy
2012-01-11
apps-discuss
None
/arch/msg/apps-discuss/ss9rIBwPKvkibqho1J_MOWIFcnE/
193337
1072876
Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definitionRe: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Jim Fenton
2010-10-13
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/2d6hQK2NltNMsNQ_vadeFDFXXdA/
716129
1405199
Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definitionRe: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Murray S. Kucherawy
2010-10-13
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/QpSzUo8zVSosb7I59ZJ-ROe_NWE/
716124
1405199
Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definitionRe: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Barry Leiba
2010-10-13
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/B3mNCcV1ZNoOPcRKfMa3sTQ_RkU/
716123
1405199
Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definitionRe: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Barry Leiba
2010-10-13
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/mXCqE8eiDWBj0qlkPv2a0KITrg4/
716118
1405199
Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definitionRe: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Jim Fenton
2010-10-13
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/h1MpHnFrB8I5_TksYyr9QQgOXgI/
716092
1405199
Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definitionRe: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Barry Leiba
2010-10-13
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/RKKVeYpDXQtz0qelYUJIRhB9qZk/
716082
1405199
[ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition[ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Jim Fenton
2010-10-13
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/VCm7iJhzMtBsgiN-Cl_yLrm5t8U/
716070
1405199
Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596
Murray S. Kucherawy
2010-07-24
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/TBKx0kD4HVAT319vK9ThzkeJ8aQ/
715034
1405261
Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596
Jim Fenton
2010-07-23
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/AUgLO5ltMhRqur1MHQ8P0kLu8Ww/
715032
1405261
Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596
Murray S. Kucherawy
2010-07-22
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/eLrzBJoy3VSADxmBeyGEw1Z56yI/
715030
1405261
[ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596[ietf-dkim] DKIM errata 1532 and 1596
Barry Leiba
2010-07-22
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/BW9LSDSECRXPDvgFJe3s8IGF1PY/
715029
1405261
Re: [ietf-dkim] Broken signatures, was Why mailing lists should strip themRe: [ietf-dkim] Broken signatures, was Why mailing lists should strip them
Alessandro Vesely
2010-04-30
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/UggJdLW0dLFcWINMurMrFG3YXPM/
714477
1405283
Re: [ietf-dkim] Broken signatures, was Why mailing lists should strip themRe: [ietf-dkim] Broken signatures, was Why mailing lists should strip them
Murray S. Kucherawy
2010-04-30
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/e6l6wypSdjcbBh-ps8H-xR3INaQ/
714467
1405283