Re: Last Call: draft-irtf-asrg-dnsbl (DNS Blacklists and Whitelists)

[Eric Rescorla <[e-mail]>]

At Sat, 08 Nov 2008 08:53:36 -0800,
Dave CROCKER wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Eric Rescorla wrote:
> > Speaking as someone who just got burned by exactly such a list,
> > I think I need to agree with John: I don't object to the IETF
> > publishing an informational document on this, but a PS implies
> > that IETF endorses the practice, which I don't think we should do.
> 
> 
> Eric,
> 
> Roughly 95% of all mail is spam.  That makes email a pretty onerous "practice".
> 
> So we ought to remove standards status for all email specifications.

I don't think this follows from my comment.


> Or we could consider keeping mechanism and policy separate, standardizing 
> technologies (mechanisms) and refraining from condemning them because some 
> operators have misguided policies and use the mechanisms badly.

This sounds like a false choice to me.


> Really, guys, everything we standardize has examples of misuse.  So that hardly 
> makes your current line of argument substantive.

You're certainly welcome to have that opinion, but I don't think that's
what I'm saying. For the reasons Keith is suggesting, among others,
I don't think this is a very good mechanism and therefore the IETF
shouldn't endorse it. As I said, I don't have a problem with this
document being advanced as Informational, but PS is different.

-Ekr

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
[e-mail]
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf