dmarc  

Messages by Thread

• • Re: [dmarc-ietf] dmarc - New Meeting Session Request for IETF 117 Alessandro Vesely
• [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fosterd-dmarc-spf-best-practices-00.txt Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fosterd-dmarc-spf-best-practices-00.txt Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fosterd-dmarc-spf-best-practices-00.txt Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-fosterd-dmarc-spf-best-practices-00.txt Douglas Foster
• [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun May 7 06:00:04 2023 John Levine
• [dmarc-ietf] Tree Walk Damage Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Tree Walk Damage Barry Leiba
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Tree Walk Damage Barry Leiba
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Tree Walk Damage Todd Herr
• [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-11.txt internet-drafts
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-11.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-11.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-11.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-11.txt Alessandro Vesely
• [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Murray S. Kucherawy
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Wei Chuang
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Murray S. Kucherawy
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Wei Chuang
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures John R Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Wei Chuang
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Third party signatures Douglas Foster
• [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 30 06:00:04 2023 John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 30 06:00:04 2023 Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 30 06:00:04 2023 Benny Pedersen
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 30 06:00:04 2023 Eliot Lear
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 30 06:00:04 2023 Hector iPhone6
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 30 06:00:04 2023 Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 30 06:00:04 2023 John Levine
• [dmarc-ietf] Proposed Updates for DMARCbis - Section 4.4.3 and New Appendix A.8 Hector Santos
• [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt internet-drafts
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Dotzero
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Matthäus Wander
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-10.txt Scott Kitterman
• [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jim Fenton
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Alessandro Vesely
  • [dmarc-ietf] Summary: Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Summary: Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Summary: Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Summary: Search for some consensus, was: Proposed text for p=reject and indirect mail flows Douglas Foster
  • [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Emanuel Schorsch
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Add MLS/MLM subscription/submissions controls to DMARCbis Hector Santos
• [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt internet-drafts
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt John R. Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Brotman, Alex
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Matthäus Wander
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt John R Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Matthäus Wander
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] [EXTERNAL] Re: I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Dotzero
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt John R. Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Benny Pedersen
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] I-D Action: draft-ietf-dmarc-aggregate-reporting-09.txt Douglas Foster
• [dmarc-ietf] Not knowing the organization domain causes chaos Douglas Foster
• [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 23 06:00:04 2023 John Levine
• [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Dotzero
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Barry Leiba
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Seth Blank
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Barry Leiba
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Definitely no Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Delegated authentication for Gmail Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Receiver-side authorization, was Delegated authentication for Gmail Alessandro Vesely
• [dmarc-ietf] Gaining Legitimacy Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Gaining Legitimacy Murray S. Kucherawy
• [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Laura Atkins
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Dotzero
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Laura Atkins
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Laura Atkins
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Laura Atkins
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Jesse Thompson
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Douglas Foster
  • [dmarc-ietf] About UAID User Agent Identity. Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Dotzero
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Scott Kitterman
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Alessandro Vesely
  • [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis Dotzero
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Two basic Issues to address to help complete DMARCbis Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Dotzero
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Is From spoofing an interoperability issue or not? Hector Santos
• [dmarc-ietf] Messages from the dmarc list for the week ending Sun Apr 16 06:00:04 2023 John Levine
• [dmarc-ietf] Author vs Signer Domains Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Author vs Signer Domains Neil Anuskiewicz
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Author vs Signer Domains Mark Alley
• [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs Murray S. Kucherawy
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs Todd Herr
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs Murray S. Kucherawy
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs Douglas Foster
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs Todd Herr
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling MLMs Barry Leiba
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs John Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs Barry Leiba
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs Mark Alley
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs John R Levine
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs Alessandro Vesely
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs Hector Santos
  • Re: [dmarc-ietf] Signaling forwarders, not just MLMs Todd Herr

• Earlier messages
• Later messages