> -Original Message-
> From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
> Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 10:28 AM
> To: dmarc@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] ARC-Seal is meaningless security theatre
>
> On Tuesday, August 08, 2017 11:59:19 PM Bron Gondwana
This was forced by the web browser providers for SHA1. It’s being forced by the
PCI DSS standard for use of TLS1.0. So it clearly ispossible.
Mike
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Terry Zink
Sent: Friday, April 07, 2017 2:39 PM
To: dmarc
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd:
> -Original Message-
> From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hector Santos
> Sent: Thursday, November 17, 2016 9:30 AM
> To: dmarc@ietf.org; Ietf Dkim
> Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] [ietf-dkim] a slightly less kludge alternative to
> draft-
> kucherawy-dmarc-rcpts
>
>
Comments in-line
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2016 3:53 PM
To: Alessandro Vesely
Cc: Kurt Andersen (b); DMARC; Barry Leiba
Subject: [!!Mass Mail]Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposal to adopt ARC documents into the
WG (toward phase 2
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 6:29 PM
To: Alessandro Vesely
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org; Kurt Andersen (b); ARC Discussion
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Proposal to adopt ARC documents into the WG (toward
phase 2 milestone)
On
> -Original Message-
> From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stephen J.
> Turnbull
> Sent: Friday, March 18, 2016 3:32 AM
> To: DMARC discussion
> Subject: [!!Mass Mail]Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action:
> draft-akagiri-dmarc-virtual-
> verification-00.txt
>
> Terry Zink
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Hector Santos
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 9:09 AM
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Simple authorization offers reasonable control over
messaging resources
On 5/15/2015 2:27 AM, Terry Zink
-Original Message-
From: Hector Santos [mailto:hsan...@isdg.net]
Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 2:04 PM
To: MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Simple authorization offers reasonable control over
messaging resources
On 5/15/2015 11:07 AM, MH
2. Causes of Interoperability Issues
This section focuses on intended recipient perspective but fails to
mention/discuss the originator perspective where some subset of originators,
particularly for high value transactional messages, want the message discarded
if it passes through an
Scott,
Thanks for laying the problem space out in this manner.
Mike
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
Sent: Thursday, April 16, 2015 10:11 AM
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: [dmarc-ietf] Indirect Mail Flow Solution Utility
I've been following the thread(s) regarding how to enable 3rd parties where a
formal relationship doesn't exist and this reinforces my thought that it is
ultimately easier systemically (even allowing for the arguments that it is
unfair) for intermediaries to take ownership of messages they
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Rolf E.
Sonneveld
Sent: Thursday, April 09, 2015 10:17 AM
To: Anne Bennett; dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Updated mandatory tag/conditional signature draft
On 04/09/2015 03:24 PM, Anne Bennett
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Anne Bennett
Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2015 10:35 AM
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third Party Sender DMARC Adaptations
J. Gomez jgo...@seryrich.com writes:
a technically appropriate
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of J. Gomez
Sent: Tuesday, March 24, 2015 4:39 PM
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Next steps for RFC 7489 (DMARC)
On Tuesday, March 24, 2015 5:14 PM [GMT+1=CET], Stephen J. Turnbull
wrote:
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Stephen J.
Turnbull
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2015 2:35 PM
To: Terry Zink
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Sending email on behalf of?
Terry Zink writes:
And third (the killer) the
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 4:58 PM
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Jim Fenton's review of -04
On 12/29/2014 12:32 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
I suppose it's
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Steven M Jones
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 5:00 PM
To: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Jim Fenton's review of -04
On 12/29/2014 12:32 PM, MH Michael Hammer (5304) wrote:
-Original
It's still not quite right:
DMARC evaluation can only complete and yield a pass result when one
of the underlying authentication mechanisms passes for an aligned
identifier. If this is not the case and either or both of them
suffered some kind of temporary error
Still not quite correct...
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Dave Crocker
Sent: Monday, December 29, 2014 2:32 PM
To: Scott Kitterman; dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Jim Fenton's review of -04
On 12/29/2014 10:40 AM, Scott
-Original Message-
From: Stephen J. Turnbull [mailto:step...@xemacs.org]
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2014 1:45 AM
To: MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] wiki vs. list?
MH Michael Hammer (5304) writes:
To that point, everyone seems focused
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Tim Draegen
Sent: Wednesday, October 08, 2014 3:34 PM
To: Scott Kitterman
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] wiki vs. list? (was Re: documenting x-original-from
usage)
On Oct 8, 2014, at 3:20
Is the DMARC Usage Guide the same as the BCP or is it a different document? If
it is a different document, is the BCP going to be one of the milestones for
the WG or is it off the table?
Mike
-Original Message-
From: apps-discuss [mailto:apps-discuss-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Terry Zink
Sent: Thursday, June 12, 2014 12:37 PM
To: Franck Martin; Matt Simerson
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] Change the mailing list protocol, not DMARC.
Franck Martin wrote:
I
-Original Message-
From: dmarc [mailto:dmarc-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Talamo, Victor
Sent: Friday, June 06, 2014 4:56 PM
To: Vlatko Salaj; Popowycz, Alex
Cc: dmarc@ietf.org
Subject: Re: [dmarc-ietf] confusing 3rd party support so it remains out
I concur with Alex.
think it was useful to have the meeting and I
think we should try to organize meetings/sessions in conjunction with other
events.
From: Kurt Andersen [mailto:kander...@linkedin.com]
Sent: Tuesday, October 29, 2013 5:15 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy; Kurt Andersen; MH Michael Hammer (5304); Franck
25 matches
Mail list logo
