IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] draft-kucherawy-greylisting-bcp into APPSAWG?

TianLinyi <tianlinyi@huawei.com> Mon, 14 November 2011 02:25 UTC

Return-Path: <tianlinyi@huawei.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 D289811E8143 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Nov 2011 18:25:14 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.127
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.127 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=2.522, BAYES_00=-2.599, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, MIME_BASE64_TEXT=1.753, MIME_CHARSET_FARAWAY=2.45, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
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 wWV3z448rlwU for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 13 Nov 2011 18:25:14 -0800 (PST)
Received: from szxga03-in.huawei.com (szxga03-in.huawei.com [119.145.14.66]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 655BF11E812D for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 13 Nov 2011 18:25:13 -0800 (PST)
Received: from huawei.com (szxga03-in [172.24.2.9]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LUM006A1PDUKV@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:25:06 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxga03-in.huawei.com (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 2.14 (built Aug 8 2006)) with ESMTP id <0LUM00M0HPDUIT@szxga03-in.huawei.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:25:06 +0800 (CST)
Received: from szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com ([172.24.2.119]) by szxrg02-dlp.huawei.com (MOS 4.1.9-GA) with ESMTP id AEY67081; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:24:19 +0800
Received: from SZXEML409-HUB.china.huawei.com (10.82.67.136) by szxeml203-edg.china.huawei.com (172.24.2.55) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 14.1.323.3; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:24:17 +0800
Received: from SZXEML513-MBX.china.huawei.com ([169.254.8.59]) by szxeml409-hub.china.huawei.com ([10.82.67.136]) with mapi id 14.01.0323.003; Mon, 14 Nov 2011 10:24:11 +0800
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:24:11 +0000
From: TianLinyi <tianlinyi@huawei.com>
In-reply-to: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C15000@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
X-Originating-IP: [172.24.2.40]
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <msk@cloudmark.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Message-id: <3615F3CCD55F054395A882F51C6E5FDA181FFAD4@szxeml513-mbx.china.huawei.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_93aS+311JjSLsqUm1p2RUQ)"
Content-language: zh-CN
Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US
Thread-topic: draft-kucherawy-greylisting-bcp into APPSAWG?
Thread-index: AcyicKz1WilxOxrqQziE0yZx+SjG6wAA47bj
X-MS-Has-Attach:
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator:
X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected
References: <F5833273385BB34F99288B3648C4F06F19C6C15000@EXCH-C2.corp.cloudmark.com>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] draft-kucherawy-greylisting-bcp into APPSAWG?
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: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 02:25:15 -0000

Hi, all



Based on the content written in the draft so far, it should be the BCP.



Cheers,

Linyi



________________________________
发件人: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 Murray S. Kucherawy [msk@cloudmark.com]
发送时间: 2011年11月14日 9:56
到: apps-discuss@ietf.org
主题: [apps-discuss] draft-kucherawy-greylisting-bcp into APPSAWG?

Hi all,

As discussed in the APPSAWG meeting just now, I’d like to see if there’s interest in adopting this into APPSAWG for processing.  There wasn’t any resistance, but a few people provided the following useful input towards its development:


-          Should it be BCP or Informational?

-          It should discuss how not to do greylisting as well as how to do it

-          Some collaboration with the ASRG is suggested in terms of collecting data about which approaches work best, etc.

And of course the main question is: Is this appropriate for APPSAWG?

-MSK

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email