RE: IP-based reputation services vs. DNSBL (long)

> Would refusing to publish as a standard stop 
> implementations or merely create potential interoperability 
> issues that could lead to more legitimate messages being dropped?

How would refusing to publish a document that is already public,
CREATE potential interoperability issues? The question is not
whether this information should be made public, because it already
has been and there is no reason to believe that an IETF refusal
would in any way prevent future publication of the information.

The heart of the question is whether or not this is work that
belongs in the IETF.

A big part of the issue is the fact that this draft glosses over
the security considerations of DNSBLs. If the draft had taken more
than three brief paragraphs to discuss these, then we would be 
having a different discussion.

DNSBLs are a temporary band-aid solution for a badly broken
Internet email architecture. They have provided the community
with an education but that doesn't mean that they should be
standardised by the IETF.

--Michael Dillon
_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf