-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of SM
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:19 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: [ietf-dkim] Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-rfc4871bis-02
Hello,
I commented on
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 3:52 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 3.6.2.1 - Working with other TXT
records
By the way, has everyone
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Mark Delany
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 5:53 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] double header reality check
Any filter or agent that makes any
-Original Message-
From: John R. Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 20, 2010 5:08 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] double header reality check
Here's maybe a better way to frame the question: Should we empower
-Original Message-
From: John Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:50 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
Why do we think such a sorting module can't/won't have
-Original Message-
From: i...@sussex.ac.uk [mailto:i...@sussex.ac.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:59 AM
To: John R. Levine; Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
True, but there already are UI designs
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Tuesday, October 19, 2010 2:47 PM
To: DKIM List
Subject: [ietf-dkim] double header reality check
So it establishes a false sense of resolving a
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of John Levine
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 7:14 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Cc: dcroc...@bbiw.net
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 3.6.2.1 - Working with other TXT records
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Mark Delany
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 11:19 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] DKIM and patents
On Sat, Oct 16, 2010 at 02:54:13PM +1200, Franck
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 8:37 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-04.txt
I have two
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 10:43 AM
To: Wietse Venema; ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2010 11:56 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] sophistry is bad, was Data integrity claims
The current DKIM
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Mark Delany
Sent: Sunday, October 17, 2010 6:23 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Data integrity claims
By DKIM process, I would include anything
-Original Message-
From: MH Michael Hammer (5304) [mailto:mham...@ag.com]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 11:44 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy; ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] Data integrity claims
There's nothing between an MTA and an MUA that prevents this attack
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 11:50 AM
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] How MUAs render mail
Folks making assertions about what MUAs
-Original Message-
From: MH Michael Hammer (5304) [mailto:mham...@ag.com]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 12:11 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy; ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] Data integrity claims
See above. This leads me to believe that you might be amenable
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 4:24 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
Irrelevant for
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Douglas Otis
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 3:33 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Data integrity claims
Should the charter of a security related
-Original Message-
From: John R. Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Monday, October 18, 2010 5:25 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
Also, although I certainly do not purport to be a whiz at UI
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 6:58 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
Which module does
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 7:30 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
And if we are not going to fix ADSP
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:13 AM
To: Barry Leiba
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis-02 - Section 8.14 comments
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 6:52 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
That's why all
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:04 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
And since
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Hector Santos
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:17 AM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Cc: Barry Leiba
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
So I
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:48 AM
To: Hector Santos
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] 2 Day Collection Stats
-- 25.9% :
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jim Fenton
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 10:25 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Given the lack of
-Original Message-
From: i-d-announce-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:i-d-announce-boun...@ietf.org] On
Behalf Of internet-dra...@ietf.org
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 11:15 AM
To: i-d-annou...@ietf.org
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: I-D Action:draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-04.txt
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Mark Delany
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 11:15 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] 2 Day Collection Stats
57 of them failed even in the presence of
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 11:41 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] 2 Day Collection Stats
57 of them failed even
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jeff Macdonald
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 12:54 PM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 3.6.2.1 - Working with other TXT
records
Does ADSP need to be
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 1:52 PM
To: Bill Oxley @ Cox; dcroc...@bbiw.net
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Douglas Otis
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 2:30 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
Citing a layer violation
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
Sent: Friday, October 15, 2010 5:09 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Data integrity claims
I thought the What DKIM does thing was a
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:49 PM
To: dcroc...@bbiw.net
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
What you
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 5:08 AM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] removing the g= definition?
On 10/14/2010 12:46 AM, Tony Hansen wrote:
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 5:10 AM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
On 10/13/2010 1:52 PM, Jim
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 5:23 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 3.6.2.1 - Working with other TXT records
On 10/14/2010
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 7:32 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
This is true if the message is not
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Mark Delany
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 7:38 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
-Original Message-
From: John R. Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:07 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
Adding a second From: makes the message format
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:15 AM
To: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
Am I
-Original Message-
From: John R. Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:45 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
I think if it becomes well-known that users
-Original Message-
From: John R. Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 10:50 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] layer violations, was detecting header mutations
after signing
Well, now we're back to my question to Dave
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 3:33 PM
To: Tony Hansen
Cc: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Although
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 3:31 PM
To: Barry Leiba
Cc: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
No, that
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Steve Atkins
Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 5:00 PM
To: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jim Fenton
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 9:53 PM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Between June 1 and September 1,
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:30 PM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: [ietf-dkim] Collected data (oops)
Oops, sorry for the bogus Subject: change. Feel
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jim Fenton
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 10:42 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Collected data
[sticking with Murray's subject line so as not to
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jeff Macdonald
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 11:27 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
rant
Count me as one of those who was
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jeff Macdonald
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:15 PM
To: DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] What DKIM provides, again
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 4:01 PM, Michael Thomas
-Original Message-
From: John Levine [mailto:jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 2:47 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
DKIM simply highlights an issue that's been there for a very
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Mark Delany
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:59 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
I understand the issues
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 3:46 PM
To: IETF DKIM WG
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Last call comment: Changing the g= definition
Everyone, please weigh in on
-Original Message-
From: Jim Fenton [mailto:fen...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 3:22 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis-02 - Section 8.14 comments
Here's some text I propose for section 8.14, in place
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Barry Leiba
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 8:48 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis-02 - Section 8.14 comments
Hector says...
If DKIM
I don't think this is really something this WG needs to deal with, though I
could be wrong. It's forwarded here just for informational purposes.
From: marf-boun...@ietf.org [mailto:marf-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Murray
S. Kucherawy
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 12:11 PM
To: m
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jim Fenton
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 9:48 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis-02 - Section 8.14 comments
I had trouble
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Ian Eiloart
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 2:36 AM
To: Charles Lindsey; DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
But it IS a serious protocol
Naturally, moments after posting an update to the implementation report, some
other interesting data came to light. One of our project members decided to
start watching the DNS for what queries were hitting his nameservers after
turning up DNS signing. The result included queries for policy
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jim Fenton
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 1:46 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] I-D
Action:draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-03.txt
The same
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Monday, October 11, 2010 3:18 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
It's not really an
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Alessandro Vesely
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 8:34 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
The whole discussion
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 10:01 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
We want to re-submit
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Wietse Venema
Sent: Friday, October 08, 2010 1:16 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] detecting header mutations after signing
What I describe would be
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Michael Thomas
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 9:09 AM
To: Charles Lindsey
Cc: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
I'm with Steve on this
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 3:29 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis - Security Loop hole with Multiple
5322.From
If we can't rely
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 3:50 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
But since it is already a REQUIREMENT of
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 3:03 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] New Version Notification for
draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-03
You can define
Hi SM,
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of SM
Sent: Thursday, October 07, 2010 1:02 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
At 10:57 06-10-10, MH Michael
-Original Message-
From: MH Michael Hammer (5304) [mailto:mham...@ag.com]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 12:20 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy; ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: RE: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
So, my belief is that this is really more of a 5322
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 4:36 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] New Version Notification for
draft-ietf-dkim-mailinglists-03
Of the points I
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Charles Lindsey
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 3:47 AM
To: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis - Security Loop hole with Multiple
5322.From
And note that
-Original Message-
From: Dave CROCKER [mailto:d...@dcrocker.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 6:12 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: DKIM
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] New Version Notification for draft-ietf-dkim-
mailinglists-03
I suggest saying the holder of the message
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 6:17 AM
To: Steve Atkins
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
Recall that the
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Dave CROCKER
Sent: Wednesday, October 06, 2010 7:02 AM
To: John R. Levine
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
I find the
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of bill.ox...@cox.com
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 5:49 PM
To: jdfalk-li...@cybernothing.org
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Working group last call on
I've removed Tim Polk from the Cc: list because he is not our sponsoring AD.
Our sponsoring AD is already on this list.
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Ian Eiloart
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 5:15 AM
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Ian Eiloart
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 4:56 AM
To: Hector Santos; ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Issue: implementation Report v02 - Removal of 1st vs
-Original Message-
From: Rolf E. Sonneveld [mailto:r.e.sonnev...@sonnection.nl]
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 7:36 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: DKIM Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Working group last call on draft-ietf-dkim-
implementation-report
Are we looking
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Julian Mehnle
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 7:27 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis - Security Loop hole with Multiple
5322.From
No.
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Julian Mehnle
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 9:28 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis - Security Loop hole with Multiple
5322.From
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Scott Kitterman
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 12:24 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] ISSUE: 4871bis - Security Loop hole with Multiple
5322.From
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Mark Delany
Sent: Tuesday, October 05, 2010 8:06 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] THIS IS A MULTIPLE 5322.FROM MESSAGE
There was an assertion in
This version makes minor editorial corrections to AOL's data, adds Gmail's
data, updates OpenDKIM's data, and applies feedback recently sent to the list.
I propose a WGLC on this at the chairs' discretion. I don't have any
additional data pending to add, and it sounds like the AD is already
I wrote it, and it looks ready to go.
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org] On Behalf
Of John R. Levine [jo...@iecc.com]
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 2:06 PM
To: Barry Leiba
Cc: DKIM Mailing List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim]
This version consolidates all of the minor corrections submitted to date, as
well as the more substantive things that appeared to have consensus.
It did not include the suggestion to add a few points about MUA improvements
that would help in the area of DKIM deployment and MLMs. I'd like to
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of J.D. Falk
Sent: Monday, October 04, 2010 4:41 PM
To: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Working group last call on
draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report
Regarding
-Original Message-
From: SM [mailto:s...@resistor.net]
Sent: Thursday, September 30, 2010 6:52 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Cc: Murray S. Kucherawy
Subject: Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-01
Hello,
Hi!
I have a few comments about
draft-ietf-dkim
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Jeff Macdonald
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 8:12 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-01
Author vs.
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Murray S. Kucherawy
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 10:15 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-01
d
-Original Message-
From: Dave CROCKER [mailto:d...@dcrocker.net]
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 10:28 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-
report-01
[...]
to be:
1.1. Signing Identity
-Original Message-
From: Dave CROCKER [mailto:d...@dcrocker.net]
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 10:30 AM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-01
As a part of the IETF implementation report
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of Rolf E. Sonneveld
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 2:24 PM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Updated implementation report
Remark: I'd suggest to transform
-Original Message-
From: SM [mailto:s...@resistor.net]
Sent: Friday, October 01, 2010 4:24 PM
To: Murray S. Kucherawy
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: RE: Comments on draft-ietf-dkim-implementation-report-01
Sure, but are those numbers permanent such that later readers
One of the things our stats project is picking up is the names of header fields
that are modified or removed in transit causing verification failures.
The current leader is x-tm-imss-message-id. Anyone know what that is?
___
NOTE WELL: This list
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of John Levine
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 10:52 AM
To: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Cc: ietf-d...@kitterman.com
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Corner cases and loose ends, was,
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org]
On Behalf Of MH Michael Hammer (5304)
Sent: Wednesday, September 29, 2010 4:10 PM
To: Hector Santos; ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Cc: ietf-dkim@mipassoc.org
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Updated
-Original Message-
From: ietf-dkim-boun...@mipassoc.org [mailto:ietf-dkim-
boun...@mipassoc.org] On Behalf Of John R. Levine
Sent: Monday, September 27, 2010 10:38 AM
To: Michael Thomas
Cc: DKIM List
Subject: Re: [ietf-dkim] Corner cases and loose ends, was , draft-
301 - 400 of 656 matches
Mail list logo
