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
[dmarc-ietf] Proposed Updates for DMARCbis - Section 4.4.3 and New Appendix A.8[dmarc-ietf] Proposed Updates for DMARCbis - Section 4.4.3 and New Appendix A.8
Hector Santos
2023-04-28
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/aWMsBD0EHifxgewdbSe64LT8TKw/
3305083
2063352
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flowsRe: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows
Hector Santos
2023-04-27
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/HEp0ra5y96ov5lOdRHAHQyYc5R8/
3304326
2058711
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbisRe: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis
Dotzero
2023-04-23
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/OlkcFXeEQEj_iv79kVOOZU3C9CM/
3302724
2061458
[dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis[dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis
Hector Santos
2023-04-23
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/Td3iBmpY-q7vSicpnjE0h-L33xI/
3302705
2061458
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for GmailRe: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail
Alessandro Vesely
2023-04-22
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/se5w8UwF7Gd6bV3iRNJSPf0gwgI/
3302597
2062057
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for GmailRe: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail
Jesse Thompson
2023-04-22
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/yYj9zfkvp-SLdXgnGYP8WybPHS4/
3302575
2062057
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for GmailRe: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail
Douglas Foster
2023-04-21
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/9BiDaFJ2aDDxUuV7k_1prZiyGo0/
3302454
2062057
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for GmailRe: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail
Hector Santos
2023-04-21
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/nMxMO1OubQVgfxhlzU9MfVDyKbc/
3302436
2062057
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for GmailRe: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail
Douglas Foster
2023-04-21
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/kwgqTA5mCH8HYfka3kXC5FEK8ho/
3302283
2062057
[dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail[dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail
Douglas Foster
2023-04-20
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/C4ub4GQA6kzpFpblndzYEXJttC0/
3302115
2062057
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?Re: [dmarc-ietf] Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?
Jesse Thompson
2023-04-06
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/jX1CBzUyhYjj1aQGdrV79bcfj2k/
3296927
2059017
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?Re: [dmarc-ietf] Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?
Murray S. Kucherawy
2023-04-06
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/jOhrDrkyMCnFLsVMkdBJMTsbFHg/
3296802
2059017
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?Re: [dmarc-ietf] Example of Indirect Mail Flow Breakage with p=reject?
Jesse Thompson
2023-04-01
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/FiVx-g5WeOgZSETW_5ZTzcYG7e0/
3295245
2059017
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Sender vs From AddressesRe: [dmarc-ietf] Sender vs From Addresses
Hector Santos
2021-03-25
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/7aAF8_YJM1qyqHOndv9GsL8_pJM/
3014480
1945532
Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC vs rejectRe: [dmarc-ietf] ARC vs reject
Hector Santos
2020-12-06
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/1obBgos-7USpZZLLTLeJfD94uAE/
2972157
1928606
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #7: ABNF for dmarc-record is slightly wrongRe: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #7: ABNF for dmarc-record is slightly wrong
Seth Blank
2020-10-13
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/jJ2VQzt98yA0bltV8WFfIVGUz_U/
2941524
1917445
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #7: ABNF for dmarc-record is slightly wrongRe: [dmarc-ietf] Ticket #7: ABNF for dmarc-record is slightly wrong
Hector Santos
2020-10-13
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/eALCA-thaoUMevmTrbQEgt0Meko/
2941477
1917445
Re: [dmarc-ietf] third party authorization, not, was non-mailing listRe: [dmarc-ietf] third party authorization, not, was non-mailing list
Hector Santos
2020-08-30
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/VwFy6mOeJvtnBwd8s_vi0RFfoA0/
2925132
1906638
Re: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domainsRe: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domains
Alessandro Vesely
2020-07-31
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/wAKGXrW-J01bLidea4wGMrIGQrk/
2913728
1906638
Re: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domainsRe: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domains
Jesse Thompson
2020-07-30
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/oZ6VkrX5Yi_xONeKNu9j1crN-VI/
2913368
1906638
Re: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domainsRe: [dmarc-ietf] non-mailing list use case for differing header domains
Hector Santos
2020-07-29
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/KxW10InPJHXfMnJhg2R9j6oEdkk/
2912606
1906638
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Header munging, not ARC, can solve the mailing list problemRe: [dmarc-ietf] Header munging, not ARC, can solve the mailing list problem
Hector Santos
2020-06-20
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/KpmwlCdzBEHUikEIAJKSfCuajOw/
2893798
1899353
Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.
Hector Santos
2020-06-17
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/4YDS5efwYXQlEV7t9Vk0GLX2gIc/
2892642
1899564
Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.
Brandon Long
2020-06-16
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/yWxyPsmt2gofRMonEm0RezO8vok/
2892200
1899564
Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.
Hector Santos
2020-06-16
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/KfJnZuMqTOurELaoDpT05-UHQoc/
2892189
1899564
Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.Re: [dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.
Brandon Long
2020-06-15
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/O4G1LgCC3Tlkm7oNrt-f_a8esEE/
2891681
1899564
[dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.[dmarc-ietf] DMARC Policy Boundary Conditions - making DMARC protocol complete.
Hector Santos
2020-06-14
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/7tCH_Ffb6HQJOyyHANv2sGlYWbY/
2891349
1899564
Re: [Ietf-dkim] DKIM-Signature: r=y and MLMRe: [Ietf-dkim] DKIM-Signature: r=y and MLM
Дилян Палаузов
2018-10-24
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/k6XgWlLh_qtaJXHqaHS7heWeWI8/
2650074
1800249
Re: [Ietf-dkim] DKIM-Signature: r=y and MLMRe: [Ietf-dkim] DKIM-Signature: r=y and MLM
Hector Santos
2018-10-15
ietf-dkim
None
/arch/msg/ietf-dkim/H6-e436Yh-tYC5ASEJkSmNjlSL8/
2644103
1800249
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposed ARC "Experimental Considerations" sectionRe: [dmarc-ietf] Proposed ARC "Experimental Considerations" section
Murray S. Kucherawy
2017-12-01
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/rz8XauAZjd2d-crcLV0xPCEM5y4/
2516177
1757680
Re: [dmarc-ietf] dmarc - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 100Re: [dmarc-ietf] dmarc - Requested session has been scheduled for IETF 100
Hector Santos
2017-11-06
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/hEHltxwZFola9sWG4dodRM7QyIc/
2504644
1751622
Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC-Seal is meaningless security theatreRe: [dmarc-ietf] ARC-Seal is meaningless security theatre
Hector Santos
2017-08-19
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/hycyo7SMUML-yC3iudCtl9qWp0Q/
2436503
1720789
Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC-Seal is meaningless security theatreRe: [dmarc-ietf] ARC-Seal is meaningless security theatre
Hector Santos
2017-08-12
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/mHmDpYQrsslWtrCwJ-R6LosDVqM/
2434189
1720789
Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC RFC status to targetRe: [dmarc-ietf] ARC RFC status to target
Murray S. Kucherawy
2017-07-08
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/xFUZRhR6Z3G-jTg2vRwM6ChIYAA/
2416194
1714795
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txtRe: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txt
M. Hammer
2015-11-10
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/W03yoFf6_kpFOYpXcQHaTWgvd8g/
2114153
1125657
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txtRe: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txt
Terry Zink
2015-11-10
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/cFouJlHaIf74_3te-h0R4_0RCX8/
2114129
1125657
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txtRe: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txt
ned+dmarc
2015-11-10
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/7WhTtUnkM3O9UuSW9wLhUVfv1Lo/
2114014
1125657
Re: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txtRe: [dmarc-ietf] Responses to comments on draft-ietf-dmarc-interoperability-08.txt
Alessandro Vesely
2015-11-10
dmarc
None
/arch/msg/dmarc/uMFRxkantodycADviVn5WjmJKok/
2113933
1125657