Comments on: Analysis of Sender-ID patents http://www.shaftek.org/blog/2004/09/18/analysis-of-sender-id-patents/ ShafTek.org = SHAFranovich TECHnologies Sun, 05 Feb 2012 15:43:17 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: NetWizard's Blog http://www.shaftek.org/blog/2004/09/18/analysis-of-sender-id-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-28 NetWizard's Blog Thu, 04 May 2006 19:38:30 +0000 http://www.shaftek.org/blog/2004/09/18/analysis-of-sender-id-patents/#comment-28 <strong>SPF and Sender-ID RFCs Published</strong> After over two years of work and arguments, the IETF finally published the RFCs for SPF and Sender-ID. They are as follows: RFC 4405 - SUBMITTER SMTP extensions to be used with Sender-ID RFC 4406 - main Sender-ID draft RFC... SPF and Sender-ID RFCs Published

After over two years of work and arguments, the IETF finally published the RFCs for SPF and Sender-ID. They are as follows: RFC 4405 – SUBMITTER SMTP extensions to be used with Sender-ID RFC 4406 – main Sender-ID draft RFC…

]]> By: Yakov Shafranovich http://www.shaftek.org/blog/2004/09/18/analysis-of-sender-id-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-27 Yakov Shafranovich Sun, 19 Sep 2004 16:34:57 +0000 http://www.shaftek.org/blog/2004/09/18/analysis-of-sender-id-patents/#comment-27 This should be fixed now. This should be fixed now.

]]> By: Victor S. Grishchenko http://www.shaftek.org/blog/2004/09/18/analysis-of-sender-id-patents/comment-page-1/#comment-26 Victor S. Grishchenko Sun, 19 Sep 2004 08:57:31 +0000 http://www.shaftek.org/blog/2004/09/18/analysis-of-sender-id-patents/#comment-26 Looks like the URL is borken. I see this: <a href="http://www.shaftek.org/blog/archives/?http://www.taugh.com/weblog/2004/09/17#patapp?" rel="nofollow">http://www.shaftek.org/blog/archives/?http://www.taugh.com/weblog/2004/09/17#patapp?</a> Looks like the URL is borken. I see this:
http://www.shaftek.org/blog/archives/?http://www.taugh.com/weblog/2004/09/17#patapp?

]]>