Re: [apps-discuss] A greylisting question
John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com> Sat, 18 February 2012 16:42 UTC
Return-Path: <john-ietf@jck.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 5E38721F85EC for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:42:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -101.926
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-101.926 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.816, BAYES_05=-1.11, 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 oRJK2WXRBV6A for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:42:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from bsa2.jck.com (ns.jck.com [70.88.254.51]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 82FE621F85E6 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:42:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [198.252.137.7] (helo=PST.JCK.COM) by bsa2.jck.com with esmtp (Exim 4.71 (FreeBSD)) (envelope-from <john-ietf@jck.com>) id 1RynJ1-000Khj-Nu; Sat, 18 Feb 2012 11:38:39 -0500
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 11:42:40 -0500
From: John C Klensin <john-ietf@jck.com>
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>, apps-discuss@ietf.org
Message-ID: <858663F7C89EC31177B0ADA7@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A7DDDF@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C9A7DDDF@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
X-Mailer: Mulberry/4.0.8 (Win32)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Subject: Re: [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: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:42:47 -0000
--On Thursday, February 16, 2012 23:35 -0800 "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com> wrote: > 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? Murray, If you go down the path of commenting about things with which we have little experience, it could be interesting to explore the implications of large-scale (not just end-network) address translation as well, whether carried out by CGNs or other methods. But I think that just reinforces the view that, while a paragraph explaining what we don't know (or don't know with any certainty) could be useful, any attempt to identify specific best practices will just lead into rat holes. john
- [apps-discuss] A greylisting question Murray S. Kucherawy
- Re: [apps-discuss] A greylisting question Dave CROCKER
- Re: [apps-discuss] A greylisting question John Levine
- Re: [apps-discuss] A greylisting question Dave CROCKER
- Re: [apps-discuss] A greylisting question John C Klensin
- Re: [apps-discuss] A greylisting question Murray S. Kucherawy