IETF Logo Mail Archive

[apps-discuss] A greylisting question

"Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> Fri, 17 February 2012 07:35 UTC

Return-Path: <msk@cloudmark.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F30421F8899 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:35:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.594
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.594 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.004, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lXuOut9TiOrD for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:35:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com (ht1-outbound.cloudmark.com [72.5.239.25]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E945B21F8894 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:35:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from spite.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.72) by exch-htcas901.corp.cloudmark.com (172.22.10.73) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.355.2; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:35:54 -0800
Received: from EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.1.74]) by spite.corp.cloudmark.com ([172.22.10.72]) with mapi; Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:35:54 -0800
From: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Feb 2012 23:35:54 -0800
Thread-Topic: A greylisting question
Thread-Index: AcztRsfW5k8L11HGSwOVHMKjKtPY0A==
Message-ID: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A7DDDF@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="_000_F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A7DDDFEXCHC2corpclo_"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Subject: [apps-discuss] A greylisting question
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 17 Feb 2012 07:35:55 -0000

I suspect the IESG will ask this if we don't cover it, so let's put something in about this now...

The current draft only talks about IPv4, because that's what we have experience with so far in terms of greylisting.  How does our advice translate to IPv6?  Is it the same?

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email